@article {1985316,
	title = {Relata-specific relations: a response to Vallicella},
	journal = {Dialectica},
	volume = {62},
	number = {4},
	year = {2008},
	pages = {509{\textendash}524},
	abstract = {<p>According to Vallicella{\textquoteright}s {\textquoteright}Relations, Monism, and the Vindication of Bradley{\textquoteright}s Regress{\textquoteright} (2002), if relations are to relate their relata, some special operator must do the relating. No other options will do. In this paper we reject Vallicella{\textquoteright}s conclusion by considering an important option that becomes visible only if we hold onto a precise distinction between the following three feature-pairs of relations: internality/externality, universality/particularity, relata-specificity/relata-unspecificity. The conclusion we reach is that if external relations are to relate their relata, they must be relata-specific (and no special operator is needed). As it eschews unmereological complexes, this outcome is of relevance to defenders of the extensionality of composition.</p>},
	issn = {0012-2017},
	url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-8361.2008.01167.x},
	author = {Wieland, Jan Willem and Betti, Arianna}
}
