kantlipsum (20nov17)

git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@45866 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751

5 files changed, 985 insertions, 860 deletions

diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/README b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/README.md
index 9350103236f..f3dfcc10b1c 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/README
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/README.md
@@ -37,9 +37,3 @@ kantlipsum.sty
 To install the distribution:
 
 o run "latex kantlipsum.ins"
-o move "kantlipsum.sty" to locations where LaTeX will find
-  it (the FAQ on CTAN in /help/uktug-FAQ gives more
-  information about this magic place
-
-2012/10/14
-Enrico Gregorio
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.pdf b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.pdf
index 8589b4e07d3..0c4f945b13e 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.pdf
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.pdf
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.dtx b/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.dtx
index 76df59f8a53..afc57058963 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.dtx
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.dtx
@@ -1,59 +1,148 @@
 % \iffalse meta-comment
-%
-%% File: kantlipsum.dtx (C) Copyright 2011-2012 Enrico Gregorio
-%%
-%% It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the
-%% LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this
-%% license or (at your option) any later version.  The latest version
-%% of this license is in the file
-%%
-%%    http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
-%%
-%% This file is part of the "kantlipsum bundle" (The Work in LPPL)
-%% and all files in that bundle must be distributed together.
-%% 
-%% The released version of this bundle is available from CTAN.
-%%
-%
+%<*internal>
+\iffalse
+%</internal>
+%<*readme>
+The kantlipsum package spits out sentences in Kantian style provided
+by the "Kant generator for Python" by Mark Pilgrim, described in the
+book "Dive into Python".
+
+This is version 0.6 of the package
+
+Changes from earlier version:
+
+The `index' option for writing index entries has been added; the
+code has been polished.
+
+ Copyright 2011-2012 Enrico Gregorio
+
+ It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the
+ LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this
+ license or (at your option) any later version.  The latest version
+ of this license is in the file
+
+   http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+
+ Author: Enrico Gregorio
+         Enrico dot Gregorio at univr dot it
+
+ This work has the LPPL maintenance status "author-maintained".
+
+ This work consists of the following files:
+
+README (this file)
+kantlipsum.dtx
+kantlipsum.ins
+kantlipsum.pdf
+
+ and of the derived file
+
+kantlipsum.sty
+
+To install the distribution:
+
+o run "latex kantlipsum.ins"
+%</readme>
+%<*internal>
+\fi
+\def\nameofplainTeX{plain}
+\ifx\fmtname\nameofplainTeX\else
+  \expandafter\begingroup
+\fi
+%</internal>
+%<*install>
+\input l3docstrip.tex
+\keepsilent
+\askforoverwritefalse
+\preamble
+---------------------------------------------------------------
+The kantlipsum package --- Generate text in Kantian style
+Maintained by Enrico Gregorio
+E-mail: enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
+Released under the LaTeX Project Public License v1.3c or later
+See http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+---------------------------------------------------------------
+\endpreamble
+\postamble
+Copyright (C) 2011-2017 by
+  Enrico Gregorio
+  enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
+
+It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the
+LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this
+license or (at your option) any later version.  The latest version
+of this license is in the file
+    http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+This work consists of the file  kantlipsum.dtx
+          and the derived files kantlipsum.pdf,
+                                kantlipsum.sty and
+                                kantlipsum.ins.
+\endpostamble
+\usedir{tex/latex/kantlipsum}
+\generate{
+  \file{\jobname.sty}{\from{\jobname.dtx}{package}}
+}
+%</install>
+%<install>\endbatchfile
+%<*internal>
+\usedir{source/latex/kantlipsum}
+\generate{
+  \file{\jobname.ins}{\from{\jobname.dtx}{install}}
+}
+\nopreamble\nopostamble
+\usedir{doc/latex/kantlipsum}
+\generate{
+  \file{README.md}{\from{\jobname.dtx}{readme}}
+}
+\ifx\fmtname\nameofplainTeX
+  \expandafter\endbatchfile
+\else
+  \expandafter\endgroup
+\fi
+%</internal>
 %<*driver|package>
-\RequirePackage{expl3}
+\RequirePackage{expl3}[2017/11/14]
+\RequirePackage{xparse}
 %</driver|package>
 %<*driver>
-\expandafter\def\csname ver@thumbpdf.sty\endcsname{}
 \documentclass[a4paper,full]{l3doc}
 \usepackage{bookmark}
-%</driver>
-%<*driver|package>
-\GetIdInfo$Id: kantlipsum.dtx 0.6 2012-10-14 12:00:00Z Enrico $
-          {Dummy text in Kantian style}
-%</driver|package>
-%<*driver>
+\usepackage{kantlipsum}
 \begin{document}
   \DocInput{\jobname.dtx}
 \end{document}
 %</driver>
 % \fi
 %
+% \GetFileInfo{\jobname.sty}
+%
 % \title{^^A
 %   The \textsf{kantlipsum} package\\ Dummy text in Kantian style^^A
-%   \thanks{This file describes version \ExplFileVersion,
-%     last revised \ExplFileDate.}^^A
+%   \thanks{This file describes version \fileversion,
+%     last revised \filedate.}^^A
 % }
 %
 % \author{^^A
 %  Enrico Gregorio\thanks
 %    {^^A
 %      E-mail:
-%        Enrico DOT Gregorio AT univr DOT it^^A
+%        \texttt{Enrico DOT Gregorio AT univr DOT it}^^A
 %    }^^A
 % }
 %
-% \date{Released \ExplFileDate}
+% \date{Released \filedate}
 %
 % \maketitle
 %
+%\changes{v0.5}{2011/12/23}{First released version}
+%\changes{v0.6}{2012/10/14}{Fixes for kernel changes}
+%\changes{v0.6}{2012/10/14}{Added functions for producing an index}
+%\changes{v0.7}{2017/11/16}{Use new kernel function}
+%
 % \begin{documentation}
 %
+% \section{Introduction}
+%
 % The \pkg{kantlipsum} package is modeled after \pkg{lipsum} and
 % offers pretty similar functionality, but instead of pseudolatin
 % utterances, it typesets paragraphs of nonsense in Kantian style
@@ -66,6 +155,10 @@
 % problematic. On the contrary, the paragraphs are rather long, as
 % it's common in philosophical prose.
 %
+% \section{Example}
+%
+% \kant[1-3]
+%
 % \section{Options}
 %
 % The package has four document options, the first two of which are
@@ -142,31 +235,44 @@
 % The most striking change is the possibility to generate an index:
 % each paragraph indexes one of its words or phrases.
 %
+% \subsection*{Changes from version 0.6}
+%
+% Maintenance release with new functions from \texttt{expl3}. Now
+% a kernel released on 2017/11/14 or later is required.
+%
 % \end{documentation}
 %
 % \begin{implementation}
 %
 % \section{\pkg{kantlipsum} implementation}
 %
-% \iffalse
+%    \begin{macrocode}
 %<*package>
-% \fi
+%    \end{macrocode}
+%
+%    \begin{macrocode}
+%<@@=kgl>
+%    \end{macrocode}
+%
 %
 %    \begin{macrocode}
 \ProvidesExplPackage
-  {\ExplFileName}{\ExplFileDate}{\ExplFileVersion}{\ExplFileDescription}
+  {kantlipsum}
+  {2017/11/16}
+  {0.7}
+  {Generate text in Kantian style}
 %    \end{macrocode}
 %
 % A check to make sure that \pkg{expl3} is not too old
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\@ifpackagelater { expl3 } { 2012/07/15 }
+\@ifpackagelater { expl3 } { 2017/11/14 }
   { }
   {
-    \PackageError { kantlipsum } { Support~package~l3kernel~too~old. }
+    \PackageError { kantlipsum } { Support~package~expl3~too~old }
       {
-        Please~install~an~up~to~date~version~of~l3kernel~
-        using~your~TeX~package~manager~or~from~CTAN.\\ \\
-        Loading~xparse~will~abort!
+        You~need~to~update~your~installation~of~the~bundles~
+        'l3kernel'~and~'l3packages'.\MessageBreak
+        Loading~kantlipsum~will~abort!
       }
     \tex_endinput:D
   }
@@ -174,40 +280,35 @@
 %
 % \subsection{Package options and required packages}
 % We declare the allowed options and choose by default
-% \texttt{par}. We also need to declare a function |\kgl_number:n|
+% \texttt{par}. We also need to declare a function |\@@_number:n|
 % that is set by the \texttt{numbers} option; its default action is to
 % gobble its argument.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
 \DeclareOption { par }
   {
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_star: { \c_space_tl }
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_nostar: { \par } 
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \@@_star: { \c_space_tl }
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \@@_nostar: { \par } 
   }
 
 \DeclareOption{ nopar }
   {
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_star: { \par }
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_nostar: { \c_space_tl }
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \@@_star: { \par }
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \@@_nostar: { \c_space_tl }
   }
 
 \DeclareOption{ numbers }
-  { \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_number:n { #1\nobreakspace\textbullet\nobreakspace } }
+  { \cs_set_protected:Nn \@@_number:n { #1\nobreak\enspace\textbullet\nobreak\enspace } }
 
-\bool_new:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool
-\bool_gset_false:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool
+\bool_new:N \g_@@_makeindex_bool
+\bool_gset_false:N \g_@@_makeindex_bool
 \DeclareOption{ index }
-  { \bool_gset_true:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool }
+  { \bool_gset_true:N \g_@@_makeindex_bool }
 
-\cs_new_eq:NN \kgl_number:n \use_none:n
+\cs_new_eq:NN \@@_number:n \use_none:n
 \ExecuteOptions{par}
 \ProcessOptions \scan_stop:
 %    \end{macrocode}
 %
-% The \pkg{xparse} package is required.
-%    \begin{macrocode}
-\RequirePackage{xparse}
-%    \end{macrocode}
-%
 % \subsection{Messages}
 % We define two messages.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
@@ -221,15 +322,15 @@
 %    \end{macrocode}
 %
 % \subsection{Variables and constants}
-% The |\l_kgl_start_int| variable will contain the starting number for
-% processing, while |\l_kgl_end_int| the ending number. The
-% |\g_kgl_pars_seq| sequence will contain the pseudokantian sentences
-% and |\g_kgl_words_seq| that contains the words to index.
+% The |\l_@@_start_int| variable will contain the starting number for
+% processing, while |\l_@@_end_int| the ending number. The
+% |\g_@@_pars_seq| sequence will contain the pseudokantian sentences
+% and |\g_@@_words_seq| that contains the words to index.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\int_new:N \l_kgl_start_int
-\int_new:N \l_kgl_end_int
-\seq_new:N \g_kgl_pars_seq
-\seq_new:N \g_kgl_words_seq
+\int_new:N \l_@@_start_int
+\int_new:N \l_@@_end_int
+\seq_new:N \g_@@_pars_seq
+\seq_new:N \g_@@_words_seq
 %    \end{macrocode}
 %
 % \subsection{User level commands}
@@ -245,10 +346,10 @@
   {
    \group_begin:
    \IfBooleanTF{#1}
-     { \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \kgl_star: }
-     { \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \kgl_nostar: }
-   \kgl_process:nn #2
-   \kgl_print:
+     { \cs_set_eq:NN \@@_par: \@@_star: }
+     { \cs_set_eq:NN \@@_par: \@@_nostar: }
+   \@@_process:nn #2
+   \@@_print:
    \group_end:
   }
 %    \end{macrocode}
@@ -257,7 +358,7 @@
 % \begin{function}{\kantdef}
 % Sometimes one needs just a piece of text without implicit \cs{par}
 % attached, so we provide \cs{kantdef}. In a group we neutralize the
-% meaning of |\kgl_number:n| and |\kgl_par:| and define the control
+% meaning of |\@@_number:n| and |\@@_par:| and define the control
 % sequence given as first argument to the pseudokantian sentence being
 % the $k$th element of the sequence containing them, where $k$ is the
 % number given as second argument. If the control sequence is already
@@ -266,14 +367,14 @@
 \NewDocumentCommand{\kantdef}{mm}
   {
    \group_begin:
-   \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_number:n \use_none:n
-   \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \prg_do_nothing:
+   \cs_set_eq:NN \@@_number:n \use_none:n
+   \cs_set_eq:NN \@@_par: \prg_do_nothing:
    \cs_if_exist:NTF #1
      {
       \msg_error:nnn {kantlipsum} {already-defined} {#1}
      }
      {
-      \tl_set:Nx \l_tmpa_tl { \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#2} }
+      \tl_set:Nx \l_tmpa_tl { \seq_item:Nn \g_@@_pars_seq {#2} }
       \cs_new:Npx #1 { \l_tmpa_tl }
      }
    \group_end:
@@ -282,71 +383,73 @@
 % \end{function}
 %
 % \subsection{Internal functions}
-% \begin{function}{\kgl_process:nn}
-% The function |\kgl_process:nn| sets the temporary variables
-% |\l_kgl_start_int| and |\l_kgl_end_int|. If the optional argument to
+% \begin{function}{\@@_process:nn}
+% The function |\@@_process:nn| sets the temporary variables
+% |\l_@@_start_int| and |\l_@@_end_int|. If the optional argument to
 % \cs{kant} is missing they are already set to 1 and 7 respectively;
 % otherwise the argument has been split into its components; if the
 % argument was |[|$m$|]| we set both variables to $m$, otherwise it
 % was in the form |[|$m$|-|$n$|]| and we do the obvious action.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_process:nn
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \@@_process:nn
   {
-   \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_start_int {#1}
-   \IfNoValueTF{#2}
-     { \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_end_int {#1} }
-     { \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_end_int {#2} }
+   \int_set:Nn \l_@@_start_int {#1}
+   \tl_if_novalue:nTF {#2}
+     { \int_set:Nn \l_@@_end_int {#1} }
+     { \int_set:Nn \l_@@_end_int {#2} }
   }
 %    \end{macrocode}
-%\end{function}
+% \end{function}
+% \changes{v0.7}{2017/11/16}{Use \cs{tl_if_novalue:nTF} instead of \cs{IfNoValueTF}}
 %
-% \begin{function}{\kgl_print:,\kgl_use:n}
-% The printing routine is in the function |\kgl_print:|; we start a
-% loop printing item number $x$ in the sequence |\g_kgl_pars_seq| for
-% all numbers $x$ in the specified range. The function |\kgl_use:n|
+% \begin{function}{\@@_print:,\@@_use:n}
+% The printing routine is in the function |\@@_print:|; we start a
+% loop printing item number $x$ in the sequence |\g_@@_pars_seq| for
+% all numbers $x$ in the specified range. The function |\@@_use:n|
 % function is a wrapper to be used with |\int_step_function:nnnN|:
 % it's passed a number as argument, builds the constant name
 % corresponding to it and produces the text. If the index entry is to
-% be issued, the appropriate element from |\g_kgl_words_seq| is used;
+% be issued, the appropriate element from |\g_@@_words_seq| is used;
 % the page reference might not be correct, though.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_print:
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \@@_print:
   { 
    \int_step_function:nnnN 
-     {\l_kgl_start_int} {1} {\l_kgl_end_int} \kgl_use:n
+     {\l_@@_start_int} {1} {\l_@@_end_int} \@@_use:n
   }
-\cs_new:Nn \kgl_use:n
-  {
-   \kgl_number:n {#1}
-   \bool_if:NT \g_kgl_makeindex_bool
+\cs_new:Nn \@@_use:n
+ {
+  \int_compare:nNnF { #1 } > { \seq_count:N \g_@@_pars_seq }
+   { \@@_number:n {#1} }
+  \bool_if:NT \g_@@_makeindex_bool
     {
-     \use:x { \exp_not:N \index{ \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_words_seq {#1} } }
+     \use:x { \exp_not:N \index{ \seq_item:Nn \g_@@_words_seq {#1} } }
     }
-   \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#1}
-  }
+  \seq_item:Nn \g_@@_pars_seq {#1}
+ }
 %    \end{macrocode}
 % \end{function}
 %
-% \begin{function}{\kgl_newpara:n}
-% The |\kgl_newpara:n| appends a new item to the sequence |\g_kgl_pars_seq|
-% consisting of, say, \meta{text of the 42nd sentence}|\kgl_par:|
+% \begin{function}{\@@_newpara:n}
+% The |\@@_newpara:n| appends a new item to the sequence |\g_@@_pars_seq|
+% consisting of, say, \meta{text of the 42nd sentence}|\@@_par:|
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_newpara:n
-  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#1\kgl_par:} }
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \@@_newpara:n
+  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_@@_pars_seq {#1\@@_par:} }
 %    \end{macrocode}
 % \end{function}
 %
-% \begin{function}{\kgl_newword:n}
-% The |\kgl_newword:n| appends a new item to the sequence |\g_kgl_words_seq|
+% \begin{function}{\@@_newword:n}
+% The |\@@_newword:n| appends a new item to the sequence |\g_@@_words_seq|
 % consisting of one word from the corresponding paragraph.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_newword:n
-  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_kgl_words_seq {#1} }
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \@@_newword:n
+  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_@@_words_seq {#1} }
 %    \end{macrocode}
 % \end{function}
 %
 % \subsection{Defining the sentences}
-% We start a group where we set |\l_tmpa_int| to 0 and the category
+% We start a group where we set the category
 % code of the space to 10 so as not to be forced to write |~| for
 % spaces.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
@@ -355,9 +458,9 @@
 %    \end{macrocode}
 %
 % Then we provide all of the sentences with the pattern
-% |\kgl_newpara:n {|\meta{text}|}|
+% |\@@_newpara:n {|\meta{text}|}|
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the Ideal of
+\@@_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the Ideal of
 practical reason is a representation of, as far as I know, the things
 in themselves; as I have shown elsewhere, the phenomena should only be
 used as a canon for our understanding. The paralogisms of practical
@@ -371,7 +474,7 @@ Human reason depends on our sense perceptions, by means of analytic
 unity. There can be no doubt that the objects in space and time are
 what first give rise to human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Let us suppose that the noumena have nothing to do
+\@@_newpara:n {Let us suppose that the noumena have nothing to do
 with necessity, since knowledge of the Categories is a
 posteriori. Hume tells us that the transcendental unity of
 apperception can not take account of the discipline of natural reason,
@@ -385,7 +488,7 @@ Ideal, the Antinomies; so, the transcendental aesthetic is just as
 necessary as our experience. By means of the Ideal, our sense
 perceptions are by their very nature contradictory.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, the things
+\@@_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, the things
 in themselves (and it remains a mystery why this is the case) are a
 representation of time. Our concepts have lying before them the
 paralogisms of natural reason, but our a posteriori concepts have
@@ -401,7 +504,7 @@ for our sense perceptions, and time occupies part of the sphere of the
 Ideal concerning the existence of the objects in space and time in
 general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, what we have alone been able
+\@@_newpara:n {As we have already seen, what we have alone been able
 to show is that the objects in space and time would be falsified; what
 we have alone been able to show is that, our judgements are what first
 give rise to metaphysics. As I have shown elsewhere, Aristotle tells
@@ -419,7 +522,7 @@ This could not be passed over in a complete system of transcendental
 philosophy, but in a merely critical essay the simple mention of the
 fact may suffice.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Therefore, we can deduce that the objects in space and
+\@@_newpara:n {Therefore, we can deduce that the objects in space and
 time (and I assert, however, that this is the case) have lying before
 them the objects in space and time. Because of our necessary ignorance
 of the conditions, it must not be supposed that, then, formal logic
@@ -444,7 +547,7 @@ misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our understanding
 rise to the architectonic of pure reason, as is evident upon close
 examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are what first give rise to
+\@@_newpara:n {The things in themselves are what first give rise to
 reason, as is proven in the ontological manuals. By virtue of natural
 reason, let us suppose that the transcendental unity of apperception
 abstracts from all content of knowledge; in view of these
@@ -460,7 +563,7 @@ treated like metaphysics. By means of the Ideal, it must not be
 supposed that the objects in space and time are what first give rise
 to the employment of pure reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, to avoid all
+\@@_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, to avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, on the contrary, the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions is a
 representation of our inductive judgements, yet the things in
@@ -483,7 +586,7 @@ suppose that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of
 necessity.  But the proof of this is a task from which we can here be
 absolved.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the Antinomies exclude the possibility of, on
+\@@_newpara:n {Thus, the Antinomies exclude the possibility of, on
 the other hand, natural causes, as will easily be shown in the next
 section.  Still, the reader should be careful to observe that the
 phenomena have lying before them the intelligible objects in space and
@@ -503,7 +606,7 @@ but natural causes would thereby be made to contradict the Antinomies.
 The transcendental unity of apperception constitutes the whole content
 for the noumena, by means of analytic unity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In all theoretical sciences, the paralogisms of human
+\@@_newpara:n {In all theoretical sciences, the paralogisms of human
 reason would be falsified, as is proven in the ontological manuals.
 The architectonic of human reason is what first gives rise to the
 Categories.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the paralogisms
@@ -513,7 +616,7 @@ constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must
 be known a posteriori.  Human reason occupies part of the sphere of
 our experience concerning the existence of the phenomena in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, our ampliative judgements
+\@@_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, our ampliative judgements
 would thereby be made to contradict, in all theoretical sciences, the
 pure employment of the discipline of human reason.  Because of our
 necessary ignorance of the conditions, Hume tells us that the
@@ -527,7 +630,7 @@ knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori.  Let us suppose that the
 Ideal occupies part of the sphere of our knowledge concerning the
 existence of the phenomena in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, what we have alone been
+\@@_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, what we have alone been
 able to show is that, in so far as this expounds the universal rules
 of our a posteriori concepts, the architectonic of natural reason can
 be treated like the architectonic of practical reason.  Thus, our
@@ -541,7 +644,7 @@ study of pure logic, our knowledge is just as necessary as, thus,
 space.  By virtue of practical reason, the noumena, still, stand in
 need to the pure employment of the things in themselves.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that the
+\@@_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that the
 objects in space and time are the clue to the discovery of, certainly,
 our a priori knowledge, by means of analytic unity.  Our faculties
 abstract from all content of knowledge; for these reasons, the
@@ -565,7 +668,7 @@ reason, in other words, is what first gives rise to the transcendental
 aesthetic, yet our faculties have lying before them the architectonic
 of human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {However, we can deduce that our experience (and it
+\@@_newpara:n {However, we can deduce that our experience (and it
 must not be supposed that this is true) stands in need of our
 experience, as we have already seen.  On the other hand, it is not at
 all certain that necessity is a representation of, by means of the
@@ -579,7 +682,7 @@ writings of Galileo.  As I have elsewhere shown, natural causes, in
 respect of the intelligible character, exist in the objects in space
 and time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our ideas, in the case of the Ideal of pure reason,
+\@@_newpara:n {Our ideas, in the case of the Ideal of pure reason,
 are by their very nature contradictory.  The objects in space and time
 can not take account of our understanding, and philosophy excludes the
 possibility of, certainly, space.  I assert that our ideas, by means
@@ -594,7 +697,7 @@ has lying before it our experience.  This could not be passed over in
 a complete system of transcendental philosophy, but in a merely
 critical essay the simple mention of the fact may suffice.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of our faculties is a posteriori, pure
+\@@_newpara:n {Since knowledge of our faculties is a posteriori, pure
 logic teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, indeed,
 the architectonic of human reason.  As we have already seen, we can
 deduce that, irrespective of all empirical conditions, the Ideal of
@@ -609,7 +712,7 @@ show is that the objects in space and time exclude the possibility of
 our judgements, as will easily be shown in the next section.  This is
 what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Time (and let us suppose that this is true) is the
+\@@_newpara:n {Time (and let us suppose that this is true) is the
 clue to the discovery of the Categories, as we have already seen.
 Since knowledge of our faculties is a priori, to avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the empirical objects
@@ -623,7 +726,7 @@ however, formal logic; in the case of the manifold, the objects in
 space and time can be treated like the paralogisms of natural reason.
 This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between pure logic and natural
+\@@_newpara:n {Because of the relation between pure logic and natural
 causes, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that,
 even as this relates to the thing in itself, pure reason constitutes
 the whole content for our concepts, but the Ideal of practical reason
@@ -641,7 +744,7 @@ to do with our judgements.  In my present remarks I am referring to
 the transcendental aesthetic only in so far as it is founded on
 analytic principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of our a priori knowledge, our
+\@@_newpara:n {With the sole exception of our a priori knowledge, our
 faculties have nothing to do with our faculties.  Pure reason (and we
 can deduce that this is true) would thereby be made to contradict the
 phenomena.  As we have already seen, let us suppose that the
@@ -653,7 +756,7 @@ However, it is obvious that time can be treated like our a priori
 knowledge, by means of analytic unity.  Philosophy has nothing to do
 with natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By means of analysis, our faculties stand in need to,
+\@@_newpara:n {By means of analysis, our faculties stand in need to,
 indeed, the empirical objects in space and time.  The objects in space
 and time, for these reasons, have nothing to do with our
 understanding.  There can be no doubt that the noumena can not take
@@ -663,7 +766,7 @@ the Ideal of human reason is what first gives rise to, therefore,
 space, yet our sense perceptions exist in the discipline of practical
 reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal can not take account of, so far as I know,
+\@@_newpara:n {The Ideal can not take account of, so far as I know,
 our faculties.  As we have already seen, the objects in space and time
 are what first give rise to the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions; for these reasons, our a posteriori concepts
@@ -675,7 +778,7 @@ sense perceptions.  I assert, thus, that our faculties would thereby
 be made to contradict, indeed, our knowledge.  Natural causes, so
 regarded, exist in our judgements.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
+\@@_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it
 may be in contradictions with, then, applied logic.  The employment of
 the noumena stands in need of space; with the sole exception of our
@@ -694,7 +797,7 @@ sphere of philosophy concerning the existence of the transcendental
 objects in space and time in general, as is proven in the ontological
 manuals.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, in the case
+\@@_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, in the case
 of philosophy, is a body of demonstrated science, and some of it must
 be known a posteriori.  Thus, the objects in space and time, insomuch
 as the discipline of practical reason relies on the Antinomies,
@@ -712,7 +815,7 @@ that our a priori knowledge is just as necessary as our ideas.  In my
 present remarks I am referring to time only in so far as it is founded
 on disjunctive principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The discipline of pure reason is what first gives rise
+\@@_newpara:n {The discipline of pure reason is what first gives rise
 to the Categories, but applied logic is the clue to the discovery of
 our sense perceptions.  The never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the
@@ -728,7 +831,7 @@ obvious that this is true) stands in need of the phenomena; for these
 reasons, our sense perceptions stand in need to the manifold.  Our
 ideas are what first give rise to the paralogisms.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves have lying before them the
+\@@_newpara:n {The things in themselves have lying before them the
 Antinomies, by virtue of human reason.  By means of the transcendental
 aesthetic, let us suppose that the discipline of natural reason
 depends on natural causes, because of the relation between the
@@ -742,7 +845,7 @@ Transcendental Deduction in thought, or does it present itself to me?
 By means of analysis, the phenomena can not take account of natural
 causes.  This is not something we are in a position to establish.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the things in themselves are a
+\@@_newpara:n {Since some of the things in themselves are a
 posteriori, there can be no doubt that, when thus treated as our
 understanding, pure reason depends on, still, the Ideal of natural
 reason, and our speculative judgements constitute a body of
@@ -764,7 +867,7 @@ paralogisms of natural reason, the paralogisms of human reason, in the
 study of the Transcendental Deduction, would be falsified, but
 metaphysics abstracts from all content of knowledge.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of natural causes are disjunctive, the
+\@@_newpara:n {Since some of natural causes are disjunctive, the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions is the key
 to understanding, in particular, the noumena.  By means of analysis,
 the Categories (and it is not at all certain that this is the case)
@@ -786,7 +889,7 @@ necessity, the things in themselves, because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions.  But to this matter no answer is
 possible.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of the objects in space and time are
+\@@_newpara:n {Since all of the objects in space and time are
 synthetic, it remains a mystery why, even as this relates to our
 experience, our a priori concepts should only be used as a canon for
 our judgements, but the phenomena should only be used as a canon for
@@ -802,7 +905,7 @@ take account of our faculties, as is proven in the ontological
 manuals.  Certainly, it remains a mystery why the manifold is just as
 necessary as the manifold, as is evident upon close examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, what we have alone been able to
+\@@_newpara:n {In natural theology, what we have alone been able to
 show is that the architectonic of practical reason is the clue to the
 discovery of, still, the manifold, by means of analysis.  Since
 knowledge of the objects in space and time is a priori, the things in
@@ -821,7 +924,7 @@ character, teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the
 thing in itself; however, the objects in space and time exist in
 natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, however, that our a posteriori concepts (and
+\@@_newpara:n {I assert, however, that our a posteriori concepts (and
 it is obvious that this is the case) would thereby be made to
 contradict the discipline of practical reason; however, the things in
 themselves, however, constitute the whole content of philosophy.  As
@@ -848,7 +951,7 @@ to the discovery of our understanding.  Because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions, I assert that, indeed, the architectonic
 of natural reason, as I have elsewhere shown, would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, the transcendental unity of
+\@@_newpara:n {In natural theology, the transcendental unity of
 apperception has nothing to do with the Antinomies.  As will easily be
 shown in the next section, our sense perceptions are by their very
 nature contradictory, but our ideas, with the sole exception of human
@@ -860,7 +963,7 @@ judgements are a priori.  We can deduce that, indeed, the objects in
 space and time can not take account of the Transcendental Deduction,
 but our knowledge, on the other hand, would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, our understanding is the clue
+\@@_newpara:n {As we have already seen, our understanding is the clue
 to the discovery of necessity.  On the other hand, the Ideal of pure
 reason is a body of demonstrated science, and all of it must be known
 a posteriori, as is evident upon close examination.  It is obvious
@@ -871,7 +974,7 @@ so far as I know, natural causes.  In the case of space, our
 experience depends on the Ideal of natural reason, as we have already
 seen.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {For these reasons, space is the key to understanding
+\@@_newpara:n {For these reasons, space is the key to understanding
 the thing in itself.  Our sense perceptions abstract from all content
 of a priori knowledge, but the phenomena can never, as a whole,
 furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like time, they are
@@ -884,7 +987,7 @@ contradict, so far as regards the thing in itself, the Transcendental
 Deduction; in natural theology, the noumena are the clue to the
 discovery of, so far as I know, the Transcendental Deduction.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
+\@@_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that, in respect of the intelligible character, the
 transcendental aesthetic depends on the objects in space and time, yet
 the manifold is the clue to the discovery of the Transcendental
@@ -901,7 +1004,7 @@ faculties can be treated like our concepts.  As is shown in the
 writings of Galileo, the transcendental unity of apperception stands
 in need of, in the case of necessity, our speculative judgements.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena (and it is obvious that this is the
+\@@_newpara:n {The phenomena (and it is obvious that this is the
 case) prove the validity of our sense perceptions; in natural
 theology, philosophy teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the
 content of the transcendental objects in space and time.  In natural
@@ -916,7 +1019,7 @@ has lying before it the things in themselves.  Aristotle tells us
 that, in accordance with the principles of the phenomena, the
 Antinomies are a representation of metaphysics.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves can not take account of the
+\@@_newpara:n {The things in themselves can not take account of the
 Transcendental Deduction.  By means of analytic unity, it is obvious
 that, that is to say, our sense perceptions, in all theoretical
 sciences, can not take account of the thing in itself, yet the
@@ -928,7 +1031,7 @@ possibility of the Ideal.  It must not be supposed that the things in
 themselves are a representation of, in accordance with the principles
 of philosophy, our sense perceptions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, philosophy is
+\@@_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, philosophy is
 the mere result of the power of pure logic, a blind but indispensable
 function of the soul; however, the phenomena can never, as a whole,
 furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like general logic,
@@ -947,7 +1050,7 @@ section, the thing in itself, with the sole exception of the manifold,
 abstracts from all content of a posteriori knowledge.  The question of
 this matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By means of the transcendental aesthetic, it remains a
+\@@_newpara:n {By means of the transcendental aesthetic, it remains a
 mystery why the phenomena (and it is not at all certain that this is
 the case) are the clue to the discovery of the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions.  In all theoretical sciences,
@@ -964,7 +1067,7 @@ things in themselves, therefore, are by their very nature
 contradictory, by virtue of natural reason.  This is the sense in
 which it is to be understood in this work.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, let us suppose
+\@@_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, let us suppose
 that, in accordance with the principles of time, our a priori concepts
 are the clue to the discovery of philosophy.  By means of analysis, to
 avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, in
@@ -983,7 +1086,7 @@ Ideal of practical reason relies on the noumena, the Categories prove
 the validity of philosophy, yet pure reason is the key to
 understanding the Categories.  This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Natural causes, when thus treated as the things in
+\@@_newpara:n {Natural causes, when thus treated as the things in
 themselves, abstract from all content of a posteriori knowledge, by
 means of analytic unity.  Our a posteriori knowledge, in other words,
 is the key to understanding the Antinomies.  As we have already seen,
@@ -1005,7 +1108,7 @@ that natural reason is a representation of, insomuch as space relies
 on the paralogisms, the Transcendental Deduction, by means of
 analysis.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Ideal constitutes the
+\@@_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Ideal constitutes the
 whole content for the transcendental unity of apperception.  By means
 of analytic unity, let us suppose that, when thus treated as space,
 our synthetic judgements, therefore, would be falsified, and the
@@ -1025,7 +1128,7 @@ still, the Categories, when thus treated as the paralogisms, exist in
 the employment of the Antinomies.  Let us apply this to our
 experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, thus, that the discipline of natural reason
+\@@_newpara:n {I assert, thus, that the discipline of natural reason
 can be treated like the transcendental aesthetic, since some of the
 Categories are speculative.  In the case of transcendental logic, our
 ideas prove the validity of our understanding, as any dedicated reader
@@ -1041,7 +1144,7 @@ are the mere results of the power of the Transcendental Deduction, a
 blind but indispensable function of the soul, as is proven in the
 ontological manuals.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The noumena have nothing to do with, thus, the
+\@@_newpara:n {The noumena have nothing to do with, thus, the
 Antinomies.  What we have alone been able to show is that the things
 in themselves constitute the whole content of human reason, as is
 proven in the ontological manuals.  The noumena (and to avoid all
@@ -1057,7 +1160,7 @@ its totality hypothetical principles, and the empirical objects in
 space and time are what first give rise to, in all theoretical
 sciences, our a posteriori concepts.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding excludes the possibility of
+\@@_newpara:n {Our understanding excludes the possibility of
 practical reason.  Our faculties stand in need to, consequently, the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions; still, the
 employment of necessity is what first gives rise to general logic.
@@ -1073,7 +1176,7 @@ exclude the possibility of the discipline of pure reason, yet the
 empirical objects in space and time prove the validity of natural
 causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between space and the noumena,
+\@@_newpara:n {Because of the relation between space and the noumena,
 our experience is by its very nature contradictory.  It is obvious
 that natural causes constitute the whole content of the transcendental
 unity of apperception, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.  By
@@ -1093,7 +1196,7 @@ representation of the transcendental aesthetic.  In my present remarks
 I am referring to the pure employment of our disjunctive judgements
 only in so far as it is founded on inductive principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our sense
+\@@_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our sense
 perceptions are the clue to the discovery of our understanding; in
 natural theology, necessity, in all theoretical sciences, occupies
 part of the sphere of the transcendental unity of apperception
@@ -1108,7 +1211,7 @@ all content of a priori knowledge.  The phenomena (and it remains a
 mystery why this is the case) are just as necessary as the Ideal of
 human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our
+\@@_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our
 experience is the clue to the discovery of philosophy; in the study of
 space, the Categories are what first give rise to the transcendental
 aesthetic.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the reader should
@@ -1125,7 +1228,7 @@ that the phenomena (and it is not at all certain that this is the
 case) stand in need to the discipline of practical reason; thus, our
 knowledge, indeed, can not take account of our ideas.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the study of time, our concepts prove the validity
+\@@_newpara:n {In the study of time, our concepts prove the validity
 of, as I have elsewhere shown, our understanding, as any dedicated
 reader can clearly see.  As will easily be shown in the next section,
 the reader should be careful to observe that, so far as regards our
@@ -1146,7 +1249,7 @@ suppose that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of our
 ideas.  It remains a mystery why, then, the architectonic of practical
 reason proves the validity of, therefore, the noumena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The paralogisms of practical reason can be treated
+\@@_newpara:n {The paralogisms of practical reason can be treated
 like the paralogisms.  The objects in space and time, therefore, are
 what first give rise to the discipline of human reason; in all
 theoretical sciences, the things in themselves (and we can deduce that
@@ -1164,7 +1267,7 @@ contradict philosophy, yet our a posteriori concepts, insomuch as the
 Ideal of pure reason relies on the intelligible objects in space and
 time, are by their very nature contradictory.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Time, on the contrary, can never furnish a true and
+\@@_newpara:n {Time, on the contrary, can never furnish a true and
 demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental aesthetic, it
 constitutes the whole content for ampliative principles, yet natural
 reason, even as this relates to philosophy, proves the validity of the
@@ -1183,7 +1286,7 @@ excludes the possibility of the manifold, as we have already seen.
 Consequently, the Ideal of pure reason can be treated like the
 phenomena.  Let us apply this to the Transcendental Deduction.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our a
+\@@_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our a
 posteriori concepts (and it is obvious that this is the case) are what
 first give rise to the transcendental unity of apperception.  In the
 case of necessity, the reader should be careful to observe that
@@ -1200,7 +1303,7 @@ supposed that our ideas have lying before them metaphysics;
 consequently, the architectonic of pure reason, in all theoretical
 sciences, would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Transcendental Deduction stands in need of the
+\@@_newpara:n {The Transcendental Deduction stands in need of the
 Ideal of pure reason, and the noumena, for these reasons, are by their
 very nature contradictory.  The objects in space and time have lying
 before them our ideas.  The transcendental unity of apperception,
@@ -1215,7 +1318,7 @@ natural causes exclude the possibility of, consequently, metaphysics,
 and the discipline of pure reason abstracts from all content of a
 priori knowledge.  We thus have a pure synthesis of apprehension.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
+\@@_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
 what we have alone been able to show is that formal logic can not take
 account of the Categories; in the study of the transcendental
 aesthetic, philosophy can thereby determine in its totality the
@@ -1233,7 +1336,7 @@ so far as regards the thing in itself, the Ideal, as any dedicated
 reader can clearly see.  This is the sense in which it is to be
 understood in this work.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, in respect of the
+\@@_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, in respect of the
 intelligible character, the Antinomies (and we can deduce that this is
 the case) constitute the whole content of the phenomena, yet the
 Categories exist in natural causes.  The Ideal of natural reason, when
@@ -1249,7 +1352,7 @@ can deduce that, when thus treated as the phenomena, our sense
 perceptions (and there can be no doubt that this is the case) are what
 first give rise to the discipline of practical reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the reader should be careful to observe that the
+\@@_newpara:n {Thus, the reader should be careful to observe that the
 noumena would thereby be made to contradict necessity, because of our
 necessary ignorance of the conditions.  Consequently, our sense
 perceptions are just as necessary as the architectonic of natural
@@ -1267,7 +1370,7 @@ be known a priori; in view of these considerations, the phenomena can
 not take account of, for these reasons, the transcendental unity of
 apperception.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that, for
+\@@_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that, for
 example, pure logic depends on the transcendental unity of
 apperception.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our a priori
 concepts are what first give rise to the Categories.  Hume tells us
@@ -1284,7 +1387,7 @@ content of, consequently, the transcendental unity of apperception, as
 will easily be shown in the next section.  We thus have a pure
 synthesis of apprehension.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Antinomies have nothing to do with our faculties.
+\@@_newpara:n {The Antinomies have nothing to do with our faculties.
 As is shown in the writings of Hume, we can deduce that, on the
 contrary, the empirical objects in space and time prove the validity
 of our ideas.  The manifold may not contradict itself, but it is still
@@ -1303,7 +1406,7 @@ perceptions, a blind but indispensable function of the soul.  As I
 have elsewhere shown, philosophy proves the validity of our sense
 perceptions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
+\@@_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
 phenomena, so far as I know, exist in the noumena; however, our
 concepts, however, exclude the possibility of our judgements.  Galileo
 tells us that our a posteriori knowledge would thereby be made to
@@ -1325,7 +1428,7 @@ empirical conditions and the paralogisms.  This distinction must have
 some ground in the nature of the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
+\@@_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that time excludes the possibility of the discipline of human
 reason; in the study of practical reason, the manifold has nothing to
 do with time.  Because of the relation between our a priori knowledge
@@ -1340,7 +1443,7 @@ of, thus, the manifold.  I assert that space is what first gives rise
 to the paralogisms of pure reason.  As is shown in the writings of
 Hume, space has nothing to do with, for example, necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the Ideal of practical reason, even
+\@@_newpara:n {We can deduce that the Ideal of practical reason, even
 as this relates to our knowledge, is a representation of the
 discipline of human reason.  The things in themselves are just as
 necessary as our understanding.  The noumena prove the validity of the
@@ -1352,7 +1455,7 @@ ideas are the mere results of the power of the Ideal of pure reason, a
 blind but indispensable function of the soul.  The divisions are thus
 provided; all that is required is to fill them.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
+\@@_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions can be treated like the objects in space and time.  What we
 have alone been able to show is that, then, the transcendental
 aesthetic, in reference to ends, would thereby be made to contradict
@@ -1365,7 +1468,7 @@ theoretical sciences, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that the things in themselves are a representation of, in
 other words, necessity, as is evident upon close examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, it remains a
+\@@_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, it remains a
 mystery why our experience is the mere result of the power of the
 discipline of human reason, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul.  For these reasons, the employment of the thing in itself
@@ -1386,7 +1489,7 @@ the transcendental unity of apperception can not take account of,
 however, our faculties.  But at present we shall turn our attention to
 the thing in itself.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, we can deduce
+\@@_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, we can deduce
 that the transcendental unity of apperception depends on the Ideal of
 practical reason.  Certainly, it is obvious that the Antinomies, in
 accordance with the principles of the objects in space and time,
@@ -1412,7 +1515,7 @@ paralogisms of natural reason have nothing to do with the thing in
 itself, but the paralogisms prove the validity of transcendental
 logic.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that, then, the noumena are just as
+\@@_newpara:n {We can deduce that, then, the noumena are just as
 necessary as, so regarded, the practical employment of the objects in
 space and time.  It is obvious that the manifold has nothing to do
 with our ideas; with the sole exception of the employment of the
@@ -1433,7 +1536,7 @@ perceptions.  To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain
 that our ideas exclude the possibility of, irrespective of all
 empirical conditions, our ideas.  Let us apply this to space.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It remains a mystery why our sense perceptions prove
+\@@_newpara:n {It remains a mystery why our sense perceptions prove
 the validity of our a priori concepts.  The objects in space and time,
 then, exist in metaphysics; therefore, the things in themselves can
 not take account of the transcendental aesthetic.  The Ideal of pure
@@ -1444,7 +1547,7 @@ as, in all theoretical sciences, our knowledge.  The things in
 themselves constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of
 this body must be known a posteriori.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, the
+\@@_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, the
 Transcendental Deduction exists in the Ideal.  To avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that pure reason (and it
 is obvious that this is true) is the key to understanding the
@@ -1465,7 +1568,7 @@ the transcendental aesthetic, thus, exists in our faculties.  Our
 faculties are just as necessary as the Categories, yet the manifold
 has lying before it, certainly, our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the never-ending regress in the
+\@@_newpara:n {It is obvious that the never-ending regress in the
 series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it is
 still possible that it may be in contradictions with the architectonic
 of practical reason.  The objects in space and time, so regarded,
@@ -1479,7 +1582,7 @@ our inductive judgements.  Still, the architectonic of pure reason is
 just as necessary as the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, transcendental logic (and I assert, for these
+\@@_newpara:n {Thus, transcendental logic (and I assert, for these
 reasons, that this is true) depends on the Antinomies.  Still, general
 logic (and it remains a mystery why this is true) is what first gives
 rise to the objects in space and time, because of the relation between
@@ -1498,7 +1601,7 @@ constitute the whole content of, for these reasons, the noumena.
 However, the objects in space and time are what first give rise to our
 understanding, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the Antinomies have nothing to do
+\@@_newpara:n {On the other hand, the Antinomies have nothing to do
 with pure reason, because of our necessary ignorance of the
 conditions.  Our speculative judgements are what first give rise to
 the Categories.  Time is the key to understanding natural causes, as
@@ -1511,7 +1614,7 @@ perceptions constitute the whole content of the manifold.  In natural
 theology, the discipline of natural reason, on the other hand, would
 be falsified, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the discipline of human reason, it is
+\@@_newpara:n {In the case of the discipline of human reason, it is
 obvious that the phenomena, still, are the mere results of the power
 of the practical employment of the Transcendental Deduction, a blind
 but indispensable function of the soul, by means of analysis.  As any
@@ -1535,7 +1638,7 @@ thereby be made to contradict, so regarded, the Ideal of natural
 reason.  Hume tells us that our ideas abstract from all content of a
 posteriori knowledge, as is evident upon close examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The manifold is a representation of the phenomena.
+\@@_newpara:n {The manifold is a representation of the phenomena.
 Our judgements constitute the whole content of, on the other hand, the
 things in themselves, as will easily be shown in the next section.  By
 means of analytic unity, the phenomena, in the full sense of these
@@ -1545,7 +1648,7 @@ pure reason (and there can be no doubt that this is true) is the key
 to understanding time.  In the study of formal logic, the paralogisms
 of pure reason are the clue to the discovery of, thus, the manifold.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the never-ending regress in
+\@@_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it
 is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, indeed, our
 sense perceptions.  As is proven in the ontological manuals, the
@@ -1566,7 +1669,7 @@ the mere results of the power of time, a blind but indispensable
 function of the soul.  The divisions are thus provided; all that is
 required is to fill them.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Antinomies are a
+\@@_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Antinomies are a
 representation of the Categories.  Necessity stands in need of the
 Antinomies.  By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies have lying
 before them the Ideal of pure reason; on the other hand, the
@@ -1584,7 +1687,7 @@ nothing to do with disjunctive principles.  But we have fallen short
 of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of
 necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the paralogisms
+\@@_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the paralogisms
 abstract from all content of a posteriori knowledge.  Consequently,
 the transcendental aesthetic, in reference to ends, occupies part of
 the sphere of metaphysics concerning the existence of the Categories
@@ -1603,7 +1706,7 @@ necessary ignorance of the conditions, Hume tells us that the
 manifold, irrespective of all empirical conditions, is what first
 gives rise to space.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, our experience
+\@@_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, our experience
 occupies part of the sphere of the Ideal concerning the existence of
 the objects in space and time in general, as will easily be shown in
 the next section.  It must not be supposed that our ideas (and it
@@ -1621,7 +1724,7 @@ far as I know, can never furnish a true and demonstrated science,
 because, like the architectonic of pure reason, it is just as
 necessary as a priori principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
+\@@_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that philosophy can not take account of our sense perceptions;
 in the study of the discipline of natural reason, our experience, in
 the study of the architectonic of practical reason, is the mere result
@@ -1637,7 +1740,7 @@ of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.  Human reason (and there
 can be no doubt that this is true) depends on our understanding, but
 the Ideal can thereby determine in its totality metaphysics.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
+\@@_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
 posteriori, general logic, in respect of the intelligible character,
 is by its very nature contradictory.  By means of analytic unity, it
 is not at all certain that space, insomuch as our understanding relies
@@ -1655,7 +1758,7 @@ the principles of the transcendental unity of apperception, occupies
 part of the sphere of our understanding concerning the existence of
 the phenomena in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Human reason (and we can deduce that this is true)
+\@@_newpara:n {Human reason (and we can deduce that this is true)
 proves the validity of the architectonic of natural reason.  To avoid
 all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the employment of
 the things in themselves can not take account of the phenomena.  The
@@ -1670,7 +1773,7 @@ regress in the series of empirical conditions.  Since knowledge of our
 ideas is a posteriori, the phenomena are a representation of the
 phenomena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Necessity, as I have elsewhere shown, is the mere
+\@@_newpara:n {Necessity, as I have elsewhere shown, is the mere
 result of the power of the architectonic of practical reason, a blind
 but indispensable function of the soul.  The paralogisms of pure
 reason are the clue to the discovery of the practical employment of
@@ -1685,7 +1788,7 @@ of natural reason, the transcendental aesthetic can be treated like
 general logic, yet the objects in space and time are just as necessary
 as the noumena.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, let us suppose that
+\@@_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, let us suppose that
 the Categories exclude the possibility of the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions.  The manifold occupies part of the
 sphere of the thing in itself concerning the existence of the things
@@ -1702,7 +1805,7 @@ certain that this is true) stands in need of the things in themselves.
 Philosophy is the key to understanding, thus, our sense perceptions.
 This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding would thereby be made to contradict,
+\@@_newpara:n {Our understanding would thereby be made to contradict,
 so far as regards the Ideal, necessity.  Our faculties, as I have
 elsewhere shown, are the mere results of the power of time, a blind
 but indispensable function of the soul.  Time, with the sole exception
@@ -1719,7 +1822,7 @@ rise to the paralogisms, but our judgements are the clue to the
 discovery of, in the study of the thing in itself, the discipline of
 practical reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our a priori concepts, with the sole exception of our
+\@@_newpara:n {Our a priori concepts, with the sole exception of our
 experience, have lying before them our judgements.  It must not be
 supposed that the Antinomies are a representation of the discipline of
 human reason, by means of analytic unity.  In the study of the
@@ -1746,7 +1849,7 @@ furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the
 transcendental unity of apperception, they exclude the possibility of
 hypothetical principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our faculties are speculative, our ideas
+\@@_newpara:n {Since none of our faculties are speculative, our ideas
 should only be used as a canon for time.  With the sole exception of
 the manifold, our concepts exclude the possibility of the practical
 employment of metaphysics, by means of analysis.  Aristotle tells us
@@ -1765,7 +1868,7 @@ discovery of natural causes, by means of analysis.  Let us suppose
 that, in other words, the manifold, that is to say, abstracts from all
 content of knowledge.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Aristotle
+\@@_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Aristotle
 tells us that the transcendental unity of apperception can be treated
 like the discipline of pure reason; in the case of our understanding,
 our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the noumena.  The
@@ -1781,7 +1884,7 @@ aesthetic can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because,
 like the transcendental aesthetic, it has nothing to do with
 ampliative principles.  Transcendental logic exists in our faculties.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the objects in space and
+\@@_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the objects in space and
 time have nothing to do with our judgements.  The architectonic of
 human reason has nothing to do with the noumena.  What we have alone
 been able to show is that natural causes have nothing to do with,
@@ -1799,7 +1902,7 @@ exception of the transcendental aesthetic, the thing in itself (and it
 remains a mystery why this is true) is the clue to the discovery of
 our speculative judgements.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the Ideal is a body of
+\@@_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the Ideal is a body of
 demonstrated science, and some of it must be known a priori, as is
 evident upon close examination.  Our ideas abstract from all content
 of knowledge, and the phenomena have nothing to do with, then,
@@ -1817,7 +1920,7 @@ analytic unity.  It is not at all certain that the architectonic of
 practical reason, then, is what first gives rise to necessity; still,
 our concepts stand in need to the objects in space and time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that our sense perceptions are
+\@@_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that our sense perceptions are
 the clue to the discovery of the Antinomies.  As will easily be shown
 in the next section, our experience, in particular, excludes the
 possibility of natural causes, yet the architectonic of human reason
@@ -1836,7 +1939,7 @@ content for practical reason.  But we have fallen short of the
 necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of the
 transcendental aesthetic.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, when
+\@@_newpara:n {As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, when
 thus treated as the phenomena, the transcendental unity of
 apperception can thereby determine in its totality the Ideal of human
 reason.  There can be no doubt that natural causes can not take
@@ -1854,7 +1957,7 @@ consequently, the architectonic of natural reason (and what we have
 alone been able to show is that this is true) is the clue to the
 discovery of the objects in space and time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our ideas
+\@@_newpara:n {In the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our ideas
 would thereby be made to contradict, in natural theology, the objects
 in space and time.  In all theoretical sciences, it remains a mystery
 why the employment of our understanding has nothing to do with the
@@ -1872,7 +1975,7 @@ necessity; on the other hand, philosophy occupies part of the sphere
 of the Transcendental Deduction concerning the existence of the
 intelligible objects in space and time in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Still, time is by its very nature contradictory.  The
+\@@_newpara:n {Still, time is by its very nature contradictory.  The
 paralogisms of practical reason constitute a body of demonstrated
 doctrine, and none of this body must be known a priori; for these
 reasons, the noumena are the mere results of the power of the
@@ -1887,7 +1990,7 @@ the discovery of problematic principles, since knowledge of the
 objects in space and time is a priori.  The Categories are what first
 give rise to the Transcendental Deduction.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our faculties, in the full sense of these terms, exist
+\@@_newpara:n {Our faculties, in the full sense of these terms, exist
 in the noumena, because of the relation between space and the
 phenomena.  Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, the
 paralogisms of practical reason are a representation of, indeed, our
@@ -1907,7 +2010,7 @@ in contradictions with disjunctive principles; by means of our
 knowledge, formal logic would thereby be made to contradict the
 noumena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our a posteriori concepts are synthetic,
+\@@_newpara:n {Since all of our a posteriori concepts are synthetic,
 applied logic has nothing to do with, for example, the noumena.  With
 the sole exception of philosophy, the Ideal of practical reason is
 what first gives rise to our ideas, as is evident upon close
@@ -1929,7 +2032,7 @@ objects in space and time can not take account of the noumena, but the
 empirical objects in space and time, with the sole exception of
 metaphysics, exist in the empirical objects in space and time.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the reader should be careful to
+\@@_newpara:n {On the other hand, the reader should be careful to
 observe that the Transcendental Deduction can never furnish a true and
 demonstrated science, because, like our experience, it would thereby
 be made to contradict synthetic principles.  The pure employment of
@@ -1949,7 +2052,7 @@ perceptions is a priori.  This could not be passed over in a complete
 system of transcendental philosophy, but in a merely critical essay
 the simple mention of the fact may suffice.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the
+\@@_newpara:n {Our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the
 employment of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions, but our a priori concepts can never, as a whole, furnish a
 true and demonstrated science, because, like necessity, they would
@@ -1967,7 +2070,7 @@ Antinomies; certainly, the employment of our sense perceptions
 abstracts from all content of a priori knowledge.  The paralogisms of
 pure reason should only be used as a canon for time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, I assert that the
+\@@_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, I assert that the
 paralogisms, for example, would be falsified; however, our inductive
 judgements constitute the whole content of the discipline of natural
 reason.  The noumena constitute the whole content of the noumena.  The
@@ -1988,7 +2091,7 @@ perceptions are inductive, we can deduce that the manifold abstracts
 from all content of knowledge; on the other hand, our faculties should
 only be used as a canon for the pure employment of the Categories.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that our ideas have lying before
+\@@_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that our ideas have lying before
 them the phenomena.  In the study of the employment of the objects in
 space and time, it is not at all certain that the transcendental
 aesthetic teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, so
@@ -2007,7 +2110,7 @@ of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, the reader should be
 careful to observe that, indeed, the transcendental aesthetic, still,
 exists in natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the objects in space and time are
+\@@_newpara:n {Since none of the objects in space and time are
 analytic, it remains a mystery why, in the full sense of these terms,
 the objects in space and time have lying before them the Categories,
 and our ideas (and let us suppose that this is the case) have lying
@@ -2026,7 +2129,7 @@ Transcendental Deduction stands in need of natural reason.  There can
 be no doubt that the manifold, when thus treated as the things in
 themselves, is by its very nature contradictory.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the never-ending regress in
+\@@_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions, in the study of the never-ending
 regress in the series of empirical conditions, occupies part of the
 sphere of the Transcendental Deduction concerning the existence of the
@@ -2043,7 +2146,7 @@ never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, when thus
 treated as the objects in space and time, constitutes the whole
 content for the Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that, so far as regards the
+\@@_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that, so far as regards the
 manifold and our ideas, the Categories are just as necessary as, in
 the study of the architectonic of pure reason, the discipline of human
 reason.  It must not be supposed that metaphysics is the mere result
@@ -2056,7 +2159,7 @@ the architectonic of natural reason, what we have alone been able to
 show is that our judgements constitute the whole content of, on the
 other hand, our inductive judgements, as we have already seen.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time should only be used as a
+\@@_newpara:n {The objects in space and time should only be used as a
 canon for the phenomena.  By means of analysis, to avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the noumena are just
 as necessary as pure logic; however, natural causes exist in the Ideal
@@ -2075,7 +2178,7 @@ never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like
 philosophy, it has lying before it speculative principles.  This is
 the sense in which it is to be understood in this work.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Still, the Ideal is what first gives rise to, when
+\@@_newpara:n {Still, the Ideal is what first gives rise to, when
 thus treated as our ideas, the transcendental aesthetic.  As any
 dedicated reader can clearly see, it is obvious that natural causes
 exclude the possibility of natural causes; therefore, metaphysics is a
@@ -2099,7 +2202,7 @@ a blind but indispensable function of the soul; by means of the
 manifold, time is the key to understanding space.  By virtue of human
 reason, our speculative judgements have nothing to do with the Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic constitutes the whole content
+\@@_newpara:n {Transcendental logic constitutes the whole content
 for, for example, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions.  It remains a mystery why, even as this relates to time,
 the Ideal excludes the possibility of the Categories, but natural
@@ -2118,7 +2221,7 @@ transcendental aesthetic, in the case of metaphysics, can be treated
 like necessity; for these reasons, the noumena exclude the possibility
 of the Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
+\@@_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
 posteriori knowledge has lying before it the Categories, as is shown
 in the writings of Galileo.  Thus, the Categories are the mere results
 of the power of space, a blind but indispensable function of the soul.
@@ -2137,7 +2240,7 @@ stand in need to our judgements.  The Transcendental Deduction proves
 the validity of the things in themselves, and our sense perceptions
 would thereby be made to contradict our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Galileo tells
+\@@_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Galileo tells
 us that natural causes, so far as regards necessity, can never, as a
 whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the
 manifold, they prove the validity of ampliative principles.  Let us
@@ -2156,7 +2259,7 @@ contradictory.  With the sole exception of the architectonic of
 natural reason, there can be no doubt that our understanding would be
 falsified.  This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between philosophy and the
+\@@_newpara:n {Because of the relation between philosophy and the
 objects in space and time, the Categories, in all theoretical
 sciences, are by their very nature contradictory.  What we have alone
 been able to show is that our knowledge is a representation of the
@@ -2175,7 +2278,7 @@ possibility of the paralogisms.  The thing in itself, in view of these
 considerations, is by its very nature contradictory.  Let us apply
 this to necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, our sense
+\@@_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, our sense
 perceptions, as I have elsewhere shown, should only be used as a canon
 for our ideas; in natural theology, the paralogisms, indeed, are by
 their very nature contradictory.  By virtue of practical reason, the
@@ -2193,7 +2296,7 @@ all certain that this is the case) are a representation of our ideas;
 still, time, with the sole exception of our experience, can be treated
 like our sense perceptions.  This is what chiefly concerns us.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Categories, as I have elsewhere shown, constitute
+\@@_newpara:n {The Categories, as I have elsewhere shown, constitute
 the whole content of necessity.  The transcendental unity of
 apperception is just as necessary as the transcendental objects in
 space and time.  Consequently, I assert that the thing in itself is a
@@ -2208,7 +2311,7 @@ relates to necessity, may not contradict itself, but it is still
 possible that it may be in contradictions with the architectonic of
 human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
+\@@_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
 priori, it remains a mystery why, in reference to ends, the phenomena
 prove the validity of the paralogisms.  As is proven in the
 ontological manuals, the empirical objects in space and time would
@@ -2234,7 +2337,7 @@ writings of Galileo, the objects in space and time exclude the
 possibility of our ideas; thus, the objects in space and time, for
 these reasons, are the clue to the discovery of the Antinomies.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of the never-ending regress in
+\@@_newpara:n {With the sole exception of the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions, it is not at all certain that the
 noumena, in so far as this expounds the practical rules of the
 paralogisms of pure reason, can never, as a whole, furnish a true and
@@ -2253,7 +2356,7 @@ supposed that the manifold, as I have elsewhere shown, abstracts from
 all content of knowledge; in the study of the Ideal of practical
 reason, our concepts are the clue to the discovery of our experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
+\@@_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
 Categories would be falsified.  Consequently, there can be no doubt
 that the noumena can not take account of, even as this relates to
 philosophy, the Antinomies, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.
@@ -2272,7 +2375,7 @@ manifold, that, indeed, the objects in space and time have lying
 before them our faculties, and the architectonic of natural reason
 stands in need of the things in themselves.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By means of analytic unity, the objects in space and
+\@@_newpara:n {By means of analytic unity, the objects in space and
 time (and there can be no doubt that this is the case) constitute the
 whole content of the Antinomies, but our ideas have lying before them
 the noumena.  The Ideal is the key to understanding, that is to say,
@@ -2289,7 +2392,7 @@ natural causes is a posteriori, the empirical objects in space and
 time have nothing to do with philosophy.  The divisions are thus
 provided; all that is required is to fill them.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, the noumena would
+\@@_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, the noumena would
 thereby be made to contradict, in view of these considerations, the
 paralogisms of natural reason.  Because of the relation between the
 discipline of pure reason and our sense perceptions, we can deduce
@@ -2306,7 +2409,7 @@ reason.  The reader should be careful to observe that the manifold,
 irrespective of all empirical conditions, is by its very nature
 contradictory.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that natural
+\@@_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that natural
 causes (and to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain
 that this is the case) have lying before them necessity.  We can
 deduce that our a priori knowledge (and Galileo tells us that this is
@@ -2326,7 +2429,7 @@ objects in space and time, but the objects in space and time (and it
 is obvious that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of the
 paralogisms.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, it is not at
+\@@_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, it is not at
 all certain that, on the contrary, the objects in space and time, in
 the case of space, stand in need to the objects in space and time, but
 the phenomena have lying before them the discipline of human reason.
@@ -2350,7 +2453,7 @@ posteriori; thus, time is the mere result of the power of the
 Transcendental Deduction, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul.  But this need not worry us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that, insomuch as the pure
+\@@_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that, insomuch as the pure
 employment of the Categories relies on our ideas, the things in
 themselves are just as necessary as, in all theoretical sciences, the
 noumena.  Therefore, let us suppose that the phenomena occupy part of
@@ -2375,7 +2478,7 @@ other words, would thereby be made to contradict our understanding;
 still, the employment of the noumena is a representation of the
 Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the paralogisms of human reason are
+\@@_newpara:n {We can deduce that the paralogisms of human reason are
 a representation of, in the full sense of these terms, our experience.
 The thing in itself, in reference to ends, exists in our judgements.
 As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, let us suppose that, in
@@ -2392,7 +2495,7 @@ Consequently, it remains a mystery why our concepts abstract from all
 content of knowledge, since knowledge of the objects in space and time
 is a posteriori.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between practical reason and
+\@@_newpara:n {Because of the relation between practical reason and
 our problematic judgements, what we have alone been able to show is
 that, in respect of the intelligible character, our faculties,
 insomuch as our knowledge relies on the Categories, can be treated
@@ -2412,7 +2515,7 @@ not take account of, by means of space, our knowledge.  But we have
 fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind
 when we speak of necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that space can not take
+\@@_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that space can not take
 account of natural causes.  The Transcendental Deduction can not take
 account of our a priori knowledge; as I have elsewhere shown, the
 objects in space and time (and let us suppose that this is the case)
@@ -2427,7 +2530,7 @@ can not take account of the noumena, but the paralogisms of natural
 reason, thus, abstract from all content of knowledge.  This is not
 something we are in a position to establish.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our ideas are inductive, our ideas
+\@@_newpara:n {Since none of our ideas are inductive, our ideas
 constitute the whole content of the paralogisms; consequently, our
 faculties can not take account of metaphysics.  As will easily be
 shown in the next section, the Ideal, in reference to ends, may not
@@ -2451,7 +2554,7 @@ the power of pure reason, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul, yet the objects in space and time, with the sole exception of
 the manifold, exist in our ideas.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, it must not be supposed that the
+\@@_newpara:n {In natural theology, it must not be supposed that the
 objects in space and time, so far as regards the manifold, should only
 be used as a canon for natural reason.  The manifold, so far as
 regards our a priori knowledge, teaches us nothing whatsoever
@@ -2470,7 +2573,7 @@ the Categories, but the things in themselves, however, constitute a
 body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must be known a
 posteriori.  And similarly with all the others.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our speculative judgements, therefore, prove the
+\@@_newpara:n {Our speculative judgements, therefore, prove the
 validity of the transcendental unity of apperception.  Necessity is
 just as necessary as, that is to say, transcendental logic.  The
 reader should be careful to observe that the noumena (and it must not
@@ -2484,7 +2587,7 @@ discipline of human reason.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see,
 the paralogisms prove the validity of, as I have elsewhere shown, the
 architectonic of pure reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Space may not contradict itself, but it is still
+\@@_newpara:n {Space may not contradict itself, but it is still
 possible that it may be in contradictions with, for these reasons, the
 phenomena; with the sole exception of metaphysics, our ideas exclude
 the possibility of, in natural theology, the thing in itself.  What we
@@ -2509,7 +2612,7 @@ should only be used as a canon for our knowledge.  But we have fallen
 short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we
 speak of necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time are the mere results of
+\@@_newpara:n {The objects in space and time are the mere results of
 the power of metaphysics, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul; in the study of our a posteriori knowledge, the manifold, so far
 as I know, proves the validity of the Ideal.  Hume tells us that, so
@@ -2529,7 +2632,7 @@ of the Categories, because of our necessary ignorance of the
 conditions.  But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection
 that we have in mind when we speak of the Categories.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
+\@@_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
 it is not at all certain that, for example, the thing in itself (and
 the reader should be careful to observe that this is true) can not
 take account of our experience, and our concepts, in all theoretical
@@ -2541,7 +2644,7 @@ only be used as a canon for our a posteriori judgements.  Our
 understanding can be treated like the transcendental unity of
 apperception.  The Categories can be treated like space.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of our sense perceptions are hypothetical,
+\@@_newpara:n {Since some of our sense perceptions are hypothetical,
 philosophy proves the validity of natural causes; on the other hand,
 our experience, in other words, can never furnish a true and
 demonstrated science, because, like our experience, it depends on
@@ -2559,7 +2662,7 @@ experience, by virtue of natural reason.  Therefore, the noumena, in
 view of these considerations, are by their very nature contradictory,
 as will easily be shown in the next section.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the never-ending regress in the
+\@@_newpara:n {On the other hand, the never-ending regress in the
 series of empirical conditions stands in need of practical reason.  As
 will easily be shown in the next section, there can be no doubt that,
 in so far as this expounds the contradictory rules of the discipline
@@ -2573,7 +2676,7 @@ in the writings of Hume.  Certainly, what we have alone been able to
 show is that natural causes, in reference to ends, would be falsified.
 But this need not worry us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the objects in space and time are
+\@@_newpara:n {Since some of the objects in space and time are
 speculative, let us suppose that our sense perceptions are the clue to
 the discovery of, in particular, our a posteriori knowledge.  Since
 knowledge of the transcendental objects in space and time is a
@@ -2595,7 +2698,7 @@ constitutes the whole content for, still, the intelligible objects in
 space and time, and space is the clue to the discovery of, in
 particular, our a posteriori concepts.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal of human reason has nothing to do with time.
+\@@_newpara:n {The Ideal of human reason has nothing to do with time.
 As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, so far as regards
 the Transcendental Deduction, the transcendental aesthetic, insomuch
 as the practical employment of the never-ending regress in the series
@@ -2614,7 +2717,7 @@ means of general logic, that the transcendental unity of apperception
 teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, consequently,
 the Antinomies, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our concepts are inductive, there can be
+\@@_newpara:n {Since all of our concepts are inductive, there can be
 no doubt that, in respect of the intelligible character, our ideas are
 the clue to the discovery of the transcendental unity of apperception,
 and the paralogisms of natural reason should only be used as a canon
@@ -2633,7 +2736,7 @@ Antinomies, yet the employment of the pure employment of our a
 posteriori concepts is what first gives rise to, in all theoretical
 sciences, the noumena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori, it
+\@@_newpara:n {Since knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori, it
 is obvious that the transcendental unity of apperception is the mere
 result of the power of the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions, a blind but indispensable function of the soul;
@@ -2650,7 +2753,7 @@ considerations, that our faculties, even as this relates to the thing
 in itself, occupy part of the sphere of the Transcendental Deduction
 concerning the existence of the Categories in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain
+\@@_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain
 that, that is to say, the Transcendental Deduction is the clue to the
 discovery of, in particular, our knowledge, yet the thing in itself
 would thereby be made to contradict our faculties.  As is proven in
@@ -2669,7 +2772,7 @@ as this relates to the transcendental unity of apperception, the
 Categories, certainly, should only be used as a canon for the thing in
 itself.  This is not something we are in a position to establish.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that space depends on the things in
+\@@_newpara:n {It is obvious that space depends on the things in
 themselves.  There can be no doubt that, in particular, the Ideal, in
 so far as this expounds the practical rules of the phenomena, is just
 as necessary as the transcendental unity of apperception.  There can
@@ -2680,7 +2783,7 @@ avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our
 understanding (and to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that this is true) is a representation of the Antinomies.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies are a
+\@@_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies are a
 representation of metaphysics; in the case of the practical employment
 of the transcendental aesthetic, the Categories are by their very
 nature contradictory.  It is not at all certain that the phenomena
@@ -2698,7 +2801,7 @@ nothing to do with our a posteriori knowledge.  There can be no doubt
 that metaphysics is a representation of the transcendental unity of
 apperception, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that our concepts, in accordance
+\@@_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that our concepts, in accordance
 with the principles of the noumena, are by their very nature
 contradictory, as is shown in the writings of Galileo.  Space is what
 first gives rise to, in other words, the Antinomies, and space depends
@@ -2713,7 +2816,7 @@ metaphysics, on the contrary, occupies part of the sphere of the thing
 in itself concerning the existence of our synthetic judgements in
 general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, I assert that,
+\@@_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, I assert that,
 so far as regards metaphysics, our knowledge proves the validity of,
 on the contrary, the manifold, yet the objects in space and time are
 what first give rise to, in the study of formal logic, the paralogisms
@@ -2730,7 +2833,7 @@ for these reasons, that our knowledge stands in need of the things in
 themselves, since knowledge of our faculties is a priori.  But this is
 to be dismissed as random groping.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding can not take account of our
+\@@_newpara:n {Our understanding can not take account of our
 faculties; certainly, the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions is what first gives rise to, therefore, the
 things in themselves.  It is not at all certain that, then, time
@@ -2747,7 +2850,7 @@ means of analysis.  Thus, the Categories would thereby be made to
 contradict the things in themselves, as any dedicated reader can
 clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are just as necessary as the
+\@@_newpara:n {The things in themselves are just as necessary as the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions.  As any
 dedicated reader can clearly see, the architectonic of natural reason
 (and it remains a mystery why this is true) can thereby determine in
@@ -2765,7 +2868,7 @@ ignorance of the conditions.  It is not at all certain that the
 manifold stands in need of, for these reasons, the Antinomies, by
 virtue of human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of practical reason, there can be no doubt
+\@@_newpara:n {By virtue of practical reason, there can be no doubt
 that our experience, still, occupies part of the sphere of the
 manifold concerning the existence of our analytic judgements in
 general; as I have elsewhere shown, the Categories can never, as a
@@ -2790,7 +2893,7 @@ ontological manuals, the Ideal is a body of demonstrated science, and
 some of it must be known a priori.  This may be clear with an
 example.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, so far as
+\@@_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, so far as
 regards the Ideal of practical reason and the noumena, abstracts from
 all content of a posteriori knowledge, by virtue of human reason.  To
 avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, that is to
@@ -2811,7 +2914,7 @@ science, because, like the employment of philosophy, they have nothing
 to do with hypothetical principles.  Our ideas have nothing to do with
 the transcendental aesthetic.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of philosophy, the Transcendental
+\@@_newpara:n {In the case of philosophy, the Transcendental
 Deduction proves the validity of necessity, by means of analysis.  Our
 sense perceptions have lying before them, certainly, our experience.
 There can be no doubt that space (and it remains a mystery why this is
@@ -2825,7 +2928,7 @@ in the ontological manuals, space has nothing to do with, thus, our
 ideas, yet the things in themselves, in natural theology, can be
 treated like the transcendental aesthetic.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Galileo, it remains a
+\@@_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Galileo, it remains a
 mystery why, so far as I know, the phenomena are the mere results of
 the power of the Ideal of pure reason, a blind but indispensable
 function of the soul, but the paralogisms (and there can be no doubt
@@ -2850,7 +2953,7 @@ assert, for these reasons, that this is the case) would thereby be
 made to contradict the transcendental unity of apperception.  But the
 proof of this is a task from which we can here be absolved.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, the noumena
+\@@_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, the noumena
 should only be used as a canon for the Categories.  As is proven in
 the ontological manuals, our sense perceptions, consequently, are by
 their very nature contradictory; therefore, our experience (and it
@@ -2865,7 +2968,7 @@ Antinomies constitute the whole content of our a priori concepts; on
 the other hand, the Ideal of natural reason (and there can be no doubt
 that this is true) is a representation of the manifold.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, certainly, that, irrespective of all
+\@@_newpara:n {I assert, certainly, that, irrespective of all
 empirical conditions, the Categories are just as necessary as, on the
 other hand, the thing in itself, yet the manifold proves the validity
 of, on the other hand, the employment of the transcendental unity of
@@ -2880,7 +2983,7 @@ exclude the possibility of, however, general logic; consequently, the
 paralogisms of natural reason, when thus treated as our ideas, can be
 treated like philosophy.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, our faculties
+\@@_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, our faculties
 stand in need to the transcendental objects in space and time;
 certainly, our ideas are a representation of the objects in space and
 time.  The reader should be careful to observe that the Categories
@@ -2895,7 +2998,7 @@ Aristotle tells us that there is a causal connection bewteen the
 noumena and the things in themselves?  The employment of the
 Antinomies is the key to understanding our ideas.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
+\@@_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
 employment of the transcendental aesthetic, still, exists in our sense
 perceptions; as I have elsewhere shown, the phenomena exist in the
 discipline of practical reason.  Necessity (and Aristotle tells us
@@ -2917,7 +3020,7 @@ account of our sense perceptions, but the thing in itself, so far as I
 know, can not take account of our sense perceptions.  Let us suppose
 that our ideas are a representation of metaphysics.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of human reason, the Ideal of pure reason,
+\@@_newpara:n {By virtue of human reason, the Ideal of pure reason,
 in the full sense of these terms, is by its very nature contradictory,
 yet necessity is the key to understanding metaphysics.  The Categories
 have nothing to do with, therefore, the phenomena.  We can deduce that
@@ -2930,7 +3033,7 @@ concerning the existence of the phenomena in general.  The paralogisms
 of human reason are the clue to the discovery of, on the contrary, our
 understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the
+\@@_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the
 thing in itself excludes the possibility of the objects in space and
 time, but the discipline of human reason is by its very nature
 contradictory.  It is obvious that, in other words, the manifold, in
@@ -2941,7 +3044,7 @@ yet the thing in itself is just as necessary as the Antinomies.
 Metaphysics exists in our speculative judgements.  By means of
 analysis, the phenomena are a representation of our faculties.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena stand in need to our sense perceptions,
+\@@_newpara:n {The phenomena stand in need to our sense perceptions,
 but our concepts are the clue to the discovery of formal logic.  The
 objects in space and time have nothing to do with the things in
 themselves, as is evident upon close examination.  Time teaches us
@@ -2957,7 +3060,7 @@ have already seen.  Consequently, it remains a mystery why our a
 priori concepts, on the other hand, are what first give rise to the
 Ideal of human reason, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that, then,
+\@@_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that, then,
 the Ideal of human reason, in reference to ends, is the mere result of
 the power of practical reason, a blind but indispensable function of
 the soul, but the Ideal (and the reader should be careful to observe
@@ -2981,7 +3084,7 @@ reason depends on time.  However, our a priori judgements have lying
 before them the employment of necessity, by means of analytic unity.
 }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, it is not
+\@@_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, it is not
 at all certain that the transcendental unity of apperception is the
 key to understanding the things in themselves; certainly, the
 Categories prove the validity of our faculties.  Let us suppose that
@@ -2997,7 +3100,7 @@ posteriori concepts, yet the thing in itself can not take account of,
 as I have elsewhere shown, the Categories.  The question of this
 matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, so regarded, our
+\@@_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, so regarded, our
 experience, in particular, can thereby determine in its totality our
 analytic judgements, yet necessity has nothing to do with, in
 reference to ends, the discipline of human reason.  It is not at all
@@ -3021,7 +3124,7 @@ In my present remarks I am referring to the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions only in so far as it is founded on
 hypothetical principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves prove the validity of, on the
+\@@_newpara:n {The things in themselves prove the validity of, on the
 other hand, transcendental logic; therefore, necessity has lying
 before it, indeed, the paralogisms.  What we have alone been able to
 show is that our ideas constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and
@@ -3034,7 +3137,7 @@ still, the practical employment of the transcendental objects in space
 and time, that is to say, has lying before it the things in
 themselves.  Natural causes prove the validity of necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
+\@@_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
 priori concepts, in other words, can never, as a whole, furnish a true
 and demonstrated science, because, like general logic, they prove the
 validity of hypothetical principles, by virtue of human reason.  There
@@ -3049,7 +3152,7 @@ of pure reason.  Our ideas constitute the whole content of the objects
 in space and time, but the Ideal, indeed, is the key to understanding
 our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain that
+\@@_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain that
 the Ideal of pure reason is just as necessary as natural causes; in
 the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our faculties, in natural
 theology, abstract from all content of knowledge.  The Categories can
@@ -3064,7 +3167,7 @@ whether the paralogisms exist in our experience?  Still, natural
 reason, so far as I know, would be falsified, because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions.  Our faculties would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal proves the validity of the objects in space
+\@@_newpara:n {The Ideal proves the validity of the objects in space
 and time.  To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain
 that our judgements are a representation of, however, the manifold.
 The objects in space and time exclude the possibility of necessity.
@@ -3073,7 +3176,7 @@ abstracts from all content of knowledge.  There can be no doubt that,
 indeed, the objects in space and time would thereby be made to
 contradict human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the transcendental unity of
+\@@_newpara:n {It is obvious that the transcendental unity of
 apperception can be treated like the Ideal.  I assert that applied
 logic (and it is not at all certain that this is true) stands in need
 of the objects in space and time; certainly, the Ideal of practical
@@ -3093,7 +3196,7 @@ knowledge of our sense perceptions is a priori, we can deduce that our
 experience is what first gives rise to the architectonic of practical
 reason.  This may be clear with an example.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, consequently, that the Transcendental
+\@@_newpara:n {I assert, consequently, that the Transcendental
 Deduction would thereby be made to contradict our faculties, as will
 easily be shown in the next section.  Let us suppose that our ideas,
 in the full sense of these terms, occupy part of the sphere of formal
@@ -3116,7 +3219,7 @@ noumena; on the other hand, the transcendental unity of apperception
 teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, then, the
 Ideal of pure reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the things in
+\@@_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the things in
 themselves are the clue to the discovery of the phenomena, and
 philosophy (and what we have alone been able to show is that this is
 true) teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the
@@ -3132,7 +3235,7 @@ pure reason, let us suppose that general logic stands in need of the
 Ideal of human reason, as we have already seen.  The noumena prove the
 validity of, in the study of transcendental logic, our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Space (and what we have alone been able to show is
+\@@_newpara:n {Space (and what we have alone been able to show is
 that this is true) stands in need of necessity, yet our understanding,
 so far as regards the Ideal of practical reason, can never furnish a
 true and demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental unity
@@ -3156,7 +3259,7 @@ representation of, in respect of the intelligible character, time, and
 the pure employment of the discipline of natural reason has lying
 before it our experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Still, it must not be supposed that our faculties are
+\@@_newpara:n {Still, it must not be supposed that our faculties are
 a representation of the Ideal of practical reason, as is evident upon
 close examination.  As is proven in the ontological manuals, the
 reader should be careful to observe that the objects in space and time
@@ -3177,7 +3280,7 @@ be careful to observe that, for example, the things in themselves (and
 it is not at all certain that this is the case) are the clue to the
 discovery of our concepts.  But this need not worry us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The architectonic of natural reason is the key to
+\@@_newpara:n {The architectonic of natural reason is the key to
 understanding, so far as regards our a posteriori knowledge and the
 paralogisms, time; still, the Categories, with the sole exception of
 the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, should
@@ -3195,7 +3298,7 @@ transcendental aesthetic.  Aristotle tells us that our faculties have
 nothing to do with the objects in space and time.  We thus have a pure
 synthesis of apprehension.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the noumena are hypothetical, there can
+\@@_newpara:n {Since none of the noumena are hypothetical, there can
 be no doubt that, in particular, our knowledge, in other words, is the
 clue to the discovery of the things in themselves.  Therefore, the
 Ideal is just as necessary as, then, the Ideal, as will easily be
@@ -3209,7 +3312,7 @@ in the manifold.  In the case of time, the Categories, by means of
 transcendental logic, constitute the whole content of the things in
 themselves, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic can thereby determine in its
+\@@_newpara:n {Transcendental logic can thereby determine in its
 totality, consequently, our faculties, because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions.  Since some of the paralogisms are
 analytic, there can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the
@@ -3228,7 +3331,7 @@ like time, but our judgements are just as necessary as the Categories.
 Our understanding is a representation of the objects in space and
 time, and the paralogisms are just as necessary as our experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Philosophy (and it must not be supposed that this is
+\@@_newpara:n {Philosophy (and it must not be supposed that this is
 true) is a representation of the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions; however, the Antinomies have nothing to do with,
 in the study of philosophy, the discipline of practical reason.
@@ -3249,7 +3352,7 @@ transcendental unity of apperception, insomuch as the architectonic of
 human reason relies on the Antinomies, can thereby determine in its
 totality natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, it remains a
+\@@_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, it remains a
 mystery why our judgements exclude the possibility of the
 transcendental aesthetic; therefore, the transcendental aesthetic can
 not take account of the thing in itself.  Our knowledge depends on,
@@ -3268,170 +3371,170 @@ whole content of philosophy.}
 % 
 % Now we define the sequence of index words.
 %    \begin{macrocode}
-\kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
-\kgl_newword:n {noumena}
-\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental}
-\kgl_newword:n {metaphysics}
-\kgl_newword:n {reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {science}
-\kgl_newword:n {necessity}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
-\kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
-\kgl_newword:n {regress}
-\kgl_newword:n {paralogism}
-\kgl_newword:n {empirical}
-\kgl_newword:n {space}
-\kgl_newword:n {manifold}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {aesthetic}
-\kgl_newword:n {noumena}
-\kgl_newword:n {sphere}
-\kgl_newword:n {time}
-\kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {perception}
-\kgl_newword:n {things in themselves}
-\kgl_newword:n {doctrine}
-\kgl_newword:n {regress}
-\kgl_newword:n {mystery}
-\kgl_newword:n {existence}
-\kgl_newword:n {contradiction}
-\kgl_newword:n {a priori}
-\kgl_newword:n {natural causes}
-\kgl_newword:n {analysis}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {Antinomies}
-\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {formal logic}
-\kgl_newword:n {soul}
-\kgl_newword:n {misapprehension}
-\kgl_newword:n {elsewhere}
-\kgl_newword:n {theology}
-\kgl_newword:n {employment}
-\kgl_newword:n {logic}
-\kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {theoretical sciences}
-\kgl_newword:n {a posteriori}
-\kgl_newword:n {mystery}
-\kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
-\kgl_newword:n {things in themselves}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {contradictory}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {perceptions}
-\kgl_newword:n {Galileo}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {empirical objects}
-\kgl_newword:n {judgements}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {power}
-\kgl_newword:n {hypothetical principles}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental logic}
-\kgl_newword:n {doctrine}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {totality}
-\kgl_newword:n {manifold}
-\kgl_newword:n {inductive judgements}
-\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
-\kgl_newword:n {analytic unity}
-\kgl_newword:n {Hume}
-\kgl_newword:n {canon}
-\kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
-\kgl_newword:n {universal}
-\kgl_newword:n {section}
-\kgl_newword:n {body}
-\kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
-\kgl_newword:n {sense perceptions}
-\kgl_newword:n {natural reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {exception}
-\kgl_newword:n {ampliative judgements}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {analysis}
-\kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {paralogism}
-\kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
-\kgl_newword:n {true}
-\kgl_newword:n {space}
-\kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
-\kgl_newword:n {accordance}
-\kgl_newword:n {regress}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {a priori}
-\kgl_newword:n {disjunctive}
-\kgl_newword:n {soul}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {analytic unity}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {cause}
-\kgl_newword:n {manuals}
-\kgl_newword:n {dedicated reader}
-\kgl_newword:n {a posteriori}
-\kgl_newword:n {employment}
-\kgl_newword:n {natural theology}
-\kgl_newword:n {manifold}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental aesthetic}
-\kgl_newword:n {close}
-\kgl_newword:n {full}
-\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
-\kgl_newword:n {clue}
-\kgl_newword:n {me}
-\kgl_newword:n {account}
-\kgl_newword:n {things}
-\kgl_newword:n {sense}
-\kgl_newword:n {intelligible}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {never}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
-\kgl_newword:n {need}
-\kgl_newword:n {space}
-\kgl_newword:n {virtue}
-\kgl_newword:n {Hume}
-\kgl_newword:n {still}
-\kgl_newword:n {whatsoever}
-\kgl_newword:n {even}
-\kgl_newword:n {sphere}
-\kgl_newword:n {position}
-\kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
-\kgl_newword:n {word}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {theology}
-\kgl_newword:n {mystery}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {perception}
-\kgl_newword:n {power}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {never-ending}
-\kgl_newword:n {analytic}
-\kgl_newword:n {itself}
-\kgl_newword:n {a priori}
-\kgl_newword:n {rule}
-\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
-\kgl_newword:n {empirical conditions}
-\kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
-\kgl_newword:n {disjunctive}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental}
-\kgl_newword:n {science}
-\kgl_newword:n {falsified}
-\kgl_newword:n {reader}
-\kgl_newword:n {blind}
-\kgl_newword:n {employment}
-\kgl_newword:n {discipline}
-\kgl_newword:n {function}
-\kgl_newword:n {careful}
-\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {part}
-\kgl_newword:n {noumena}
-\kgl_newword:n {doubt}
-\kgl_newword:n {duck}
-\kgl_newword:n {Kant}
+\@@_newword:n {Ideal}
+\@@_newword:n {noumena}
+\@@_newword:n {Aristotle}
+\@@_newword:n {transcendental}
+\@@_newword:n {metaphysics}
+\@@_newword:n {reason}
+\@@_newword:n {science}
+\@@_newword:n {necessity}
+\@@_newword:n {Categories}
+\@@_newword:n {philosophy}
+\@@_newword:n {knowledge}
+\@@_newword:n {regress}
+\@@_newword:n {paralogism}
+\@@_newword:n {empirical}
+\@@_newword:n {space}
+\@@_newword:n {manifold}
+\@@_newword:n {understanding}
+\@@_newword:n {aesthetic}
+\@@_newword:n {noumena}
+\@@_newword:n {sphere}
+\@@_newword:n {time}
+\@@_newword:n {practical reason}
+\@@_newword:n {perception}
+\@@_newword:n {things in themselves}
+\@@_newword:n {doctrine}
+\@@_newword:n {regress}
+\@@_newword:n {mystery}
+\@@_newword:n {existence}
+\@@_newword:n {contradiction}
+\@@_newword:n {a priori}
+\@@_newword:n {natural causes}
+\@@_newword:n {analysis}
+\@@_newword:n {apperception}
+\@@_newword:n {Antinomies}
+\@@_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
+\@@_newword:n {phenomena}
+\@@_newword:n {formal logic}
+\@@_newword:n {soul}
+\@@_newword:n {misapprehension}
+\@@_newword:n {elsewhere}
+\@@_newword:n {theology}
+\@@_newword:n {employment}
+\@@_newword:n {logic}
+\@@_newword:n {practical reason}
+\@@_newword:n {theoretical sciences}
+\@@_newword:n {a posteriori}
+\@@_newword:n {mystery}
+\@@_newword:n {philosophy}
+\@@_newword:n {things in themselves}
+\@@_newword:n {experience}
+\@@_newword:n {contradictory}
+\@@_newword:n {Categories}
+\@@_newword:n {perceptions}
+\@@_newword:n {Galileo}
+\@@_newword:n {apperception}
+\@@_newword:n {empirical objects}
+\@@_newword:n {judgements}
+\@@_newword:n {phenomena}
+\@@_newword:n {power}
+\@@_newword:n {hypothetical principles}
+\@@_newword:n {transcendental logic}
+\@@_newword:n {doctrine}
+\@@_newword:n {understanding}
+\@@_newword:n {totality}
+\@@_newword:n {manifold}
+\@@_newword:n {inductive judgements}
+\@@_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
+\@@_newword:n {analytic unity}
+\@@_newword:n {Hume}
+\@@_newword:n {canon}
+\@@_newword:n {knowledge}
+\@@_newword:n {universal}
+\@@_newword:n {section}
+\@@_newword:n {body}
+\@@_newword:n {ignorance}
+\@@_newword:n {sense perceptions}
+\@@_newword:n {natural reason}
+\@@_newword:n {exception}
+\@@_newword:n {ampliative judgements}
+\@@_newword:n {experience}
+\@@_newword:n {Categories}
+\@@_newword:n {analysis}
+\@@_newword:n {philosophy}
+\@@_newword:n {apperception}
+\@@_newword:n {paralogism}
+\@@_newword:n {ignorance}
+\@@_newword:n {true}
+\@@_newword:n {space}
+\@@_newword:n {Ideal}
+\@@_newword:n {accordance}
+\@@_newword:n {regress}
+\@@_newword:n {experience}
+\@@_newword:n {a priori}
+\@@_newword:n {disjunctive}
+\@@_newword:n {soul}
+\@@_newword:n {understanding}
+\@@_newword:n {analytic unity}
+\@@_newword:n {phenomena}
+\@@_newword:n {practical reason}
+\@@_newword:n {cause}
+\@@_newword:n {manuals}
+\@@_newword:n {dedicated reader}
+\@@_newword:n {a posteriori}
+\@@_newword:n {employment}
+\@@_newword:n {natural theology}
+\@@_newword:n {manifold}
+\@@_newword:n {transcendental aesthetic}
+\@@_newword:n {close}
+\@@_newword:n {full}
+\@@_newword:n {Aristotle}
+\@@_newword:n {clue}
+\@@_newword:n {me}
+\@@_newword:n {account}
+\@@_newword:n {things}
+\@@_newword:n {sense}
+\@@_newword:n {intelligible}
+\@@_newword:n {understanding}
+\@@_newword:n {Categories}
+\@@_newword:n {never}
+\@@_newword:n {apperception}
+\@@_newword:n {Ideal}
+\@@_newword:n {need}
+\@@_newword:n {space}
+\@@_newword:n {virtue}
+\@@_newword:n {Hume}
+\@@_newword:n {still}
+\@@_newword:n {whatsoever}
+\@@_newword:n {even}
+\@@_newword:n {sphere}
+\@@_newword:n {position}
+\@@_newword:n {ignorance}
+\@@_newword:n {word}
+\@@_newword:n {phenomena}
+\@@_newword:n {theology}
+\@@_newword:n {mystery}
+\@@_newword:n {Categories}
+\@@_newword:n {perception}
+\@@_newword:n {power}
+\@@_newword:n {experience}
+\@@_newword:n {never-ending}
+\@@_newword:n {analytic}
+\@@_newword:n {itself}
+\@@_newword:n {a priori}
+\@@_newword:n {rule}
+\@@_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
+\@@_newword:n {empirical conditions}
+\@@_newword:n {knowledge}
+\@@_newword:n {disjunctive}
+\@@_newword:n {transcendental}
+\@@_newword:n {science}
+\@@_newword:n {falsified}
+\@@_newword:n {reader}
+\@@_newword:n {blind}
+\@@_newword:n {employment}
+\@@_newword:n {discipline}
+\@@_newword:n {function}
+\@@_newword:n {careful}
+\@@_newword:n {Aristotle}
+\@@_newword:n {Categories}
+\@@_newword:n {part}
+\@@_newword:n {noumena}
+\@@_newword:n {doubt}
+\@@_newword:n {duck}
+\@@_newword:n {Kant}
 %    \end{macrocode}
 %
 % Finally we close the group and issue a message in the log file
@@ -3439,7 +3542,7 @@ whole content of philosophy.}
 %    \begin{macrocode}
 \group_end:
 \msg_info:nnx {kantlipsum} {how-many}
-  { \int_eval:n {\seq_count:N \g_kgl_pars_seq} }
+  { \int_eval:n {\seq_count:N \g_@@_pars_seq} }
 %    \end{macrocode}
 %
 % \iffalse
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.ins b/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.ins
index 884339b2852..9aca7b82cb7 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.ins
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/source/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.ins
@@ -1,36 +1,61 @@
-\iffalse meta-comment
-
-File kantlipsum.ins Copyright (C) 2011-2012 Enrico Gregorio
+%%
+%% This is file `kantlipsum.ins',
+%% generated with the docstrip utility.
+%%
+%% The original source files were:
+%%
+%% kantlipsum.dtx  (with options: `install')
+%% ---------------------------------------------------------------
+%% The kantlipsum package --- Generate text in Kant's style
+%% Maintained by Enrico Gregorio
+%% E-mail: enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
+%% Released under the LaTeX Project Public License v1.3c or later
+%% See http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+%% ---------------------------------------------------------------
+\input l3docstrip.tex
+\keepsilent
+\askforoverwritefalse
+\preamble
+---------------------------------------------------------------
+The kantlipsum package --- Generate text in Kant's style
+Maintained by Enrico Gregorio
+E-mail: enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
+Released under the LaTeX Project Public License v1.3c or later
+See http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+---------------------------------------------------------------
+\endpreamble
+\postamble
+Copyright (C) 2011-2017 by
+  Enrico Gregorio
+  enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
 
 It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the
 LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this
 license or (at your option) any later version.  The latest version
 of this license is in the file
-
-   http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
-
-This file is part of the "kantlipsum bundle" (The Work in LPPL)
-and all files in that bundle must be distributed together.
-
-The released version of this bundle is available from CTAN.
-
-\fi
-
-\input docstrip.tex
-\askforoverwritefalse
-
-\preamble
-
-Do not distribute this file without also distributing the
-source files specified above.
-
-\endpreamble
-% stop docstrip adding \endinput
-\postamble
+    http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+This work consists of the file  kantlipsum.dtx
+          and the derived files kantlipsum.pdf,
+                                kantlipsum.sty and
+                                kantlipsum.ins.
 \endpostamble
-
-\keepsilent
-
-\generate{\file{kantlipsum.sty} {\from{kantlipsum.dtx} {package}}}
-
+\usedir{tex/latex/kantlipsum}
+\generate{
+  \file{\jobname.sty}{\from{\jobname.dtx}{package}}
+}
 \endbatchfile
+%% Copyright (C) 2011-2017 by
+%%   Enrico Gregorio
+%%   enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
+%% 
+%% It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the
+%% LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this
+%% license or (at your option) any later version.  The latest version
+%% of this license is in the file
+%%     http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+%% This work consists of the file  kantlipsum.dtx
+%%           and the derived files kantlipsum.pdf,
+%%                                 kantlipsum.sty and
+%%                                 kantlipsum.ins.
+%%
+%% End of file `kantlipsum.ins'.
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty
index 617739382a4..0cf8247ca35 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/kantlipsum/kantlipsum.sty
@@ -5,64 +5,54 @@
 %% The original source files were:
 %%
 %% kantlipsum.dtx  (with options: `package')
-%% 
-%% Do not distribute this file without also distributing the
-%% source files specified above.
-%% 
-%% File: kantlipsum.dtx (C) Copyright 2011-2012 Enrico Gregorio
-%%
-%% It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the
-%% LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this
-%% license or (at your option) any later version.  The latest version
-%% of this license is in the file
-%%
-%%    http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
-%%
-%% This file is part of the "kantlipsum bundle" (The Work in LPPL)
-%% and all files in that bundle must be distributed together.
-%%
-%% The released version of this bundle is available from CTAN.
-%%
-\RequirePackage{expl3}
-\GetIdInfo$Id: kantlipsum.dtx 0.6 2012-10-14 12:00:00Z Enrico $
-          {Dummy text in Kantian style}
+%% ---------------------------------------------------------------
+%% The kantlipsum package --- Generate text in Kant's style
+%% Maintained by Enrico Gregorio
+%% E-mail: enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
+%% Released under the LaTeX Project Public License v1.3c or later
+%% See http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+%% ---------------------------------------------------------------
+\RequirePackage{expl3}[2017/11/14]
+\RequirePackage{xparse}
 \ProvidesExplPackage
-  {\ExplFileName}{\ExplFileDate}{\ExplFileVersion}{\ExplFileDescription}
-\@ifpackagelater { expl3 } { 2012/07/15 }
+  {kantlipsum}
+  {2017/11/16}
+  {0.7}
+  {Generate text in Kantian style}
+\@ifpackagelater { expl3 } { 2017/11/14 }
   { }
   {
-    \PackageError { kantlipsum } { Support~package~l3kernel~too~old. }
+    \PackageError { kantlipsum } { Support~package~expl3~too~old }
       {
-        Please~install~an~up~to~date~version~of~l3kernel~
-        using~your~TeX~package~manager~or~from~CTAN.\\ \\
-        Loading~xparse~will~abort!
+        You~need~to~update~your~installation~of~the~bundles~
+        'l3kernel'~and~'l3packages'.\MessageBreak
+        Loading~kantlipsum~will~abort!
       }
     \tex_endinput:D
   }
 \DeclareOption { par }
   {
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_star: { \c_space_tl }
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_nostar: { \par }
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_star: { \c_space_tl }
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_nostar: { \par }
   }
 
 \DeclareOption{ nopar }
   {
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_star: { \par }
-   \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_nostar: { \c_space_tl }
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_star: { \par }
+   \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_nostar: { \c_space_tl }
   }
 
 \DeclareOption{ numbers }
-  { \cs_set_protected:Nn \kgl_number:n { #1\nobreakspace\textbullet\nobreakspace } }
+  { \cs_set_protected:Nn \__kgl_number:n { #1\nobreak\enspace\textbullet\nobreak\enspace } }
 
-\bool_new:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool
-\bool_gset_false:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool
+\bool_new:N \g__kgl_makeindex_bool
+\bool_gset_false:N \g__kgl_makeindex_bool
 \DeclareOption{ index }
-  { \bool_gset_true:N \g_kgl_makeindex_bool }
+  { \bool_gset_true:N \g__kgl_makeindex_bool }
 
-\cs_new_eq:NN \kgl_number:n \use_none:n
+\cs_new_eq:NN \__kgl_number:n \use_none:n
 \ExecuteOptions{par}
 \ProcessOptions \scan_stop:
-\RequirePackage{xparse}
 \msg_new:nnn {kantlipsum}{how-many}
   {The~package~provides~paragraphs~1~to~#1.~
    Values~outside~this~range~will~be~ignored.}
@@ -70,63 +60,64 @@
   {Control~sequence~#1~already~defined.}
   {The~control~sequence~#1~is~already~defined,~
    I'll~ignore~it}
-\int_new:N \l_kgl_start_int
-\int_new:N \l_kgl_end_int
-\seq_new:N \g_kgl_pars_seq
-\seq_new:N \g_kgl_words_seq
+\int_new:N \l__kgl_start_int
+\int_new:N \l__kgl_end_int
+\seq_new:N \g__kgl_pars_seq
+\seq_new:N \g__kgl_words_seq
 \NewDocumentCommand{\kant}{s>{\SplitArgument{1}{-}}O{1-7}}
   {
    \group_begin:
    \IfBooleanTF{#1}
-     { \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \kgl_star: }
-     { \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \kgl_nostar: }
-   \kgl_process:nn #2
-   \kgl_print:
+     { \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_par: \__kgl_star: }
+     { \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_par: \__kgl_nostar: }
+   \__kgl_process:nn #2
+   \__kgl_print:
    \group_end:
   }
 \NewDocumentCommand{\kantdef}{mm}
   {
    \group_begin:
-   \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_number:n \use_none:n
-   \cs_set_eq:NN \kgl_par: \prg_do_nothing:
+   \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_number:n \use_none:n
+   \cs_set_eq:NN \__kgl_par: \prg_do_nothing:
    \cs_if_exist:NTF #1
      {
       \msg_error:nnn {kantlipsum} {already-defined} {#1}
      }
      {
-      \tl_set:Nx \l_tmpa_tl { \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#2} }
+      \tl_set:Nx \l_tmpa_tl { \seq_item:Nn \g__kgl_pars_seq {#2} }
       \cs_new:Npx #1 { \l_tmpa_tl }
      }
    \group_end:
   }
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_process:nn
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_process:nn
   {
-   \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_start_int {#1}
-   \IfNoValueTF{#2}
-     { \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_end_int {#1} }
-     { \int_set:Nn \l_kgl_end_int {#2} }
+   \int_set:Nn \l__kgl_start_int {#1}
+   \tl_if_novalue:nTF {#2}
+     { \int_set:Nn \l__kgl_end_int {#1} }
+     { \int_set:Nn \l__kgl_end_int {#2} }
   }
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_print:
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_print:
   {
    \int_step_function:nnnN
-     {\l_kgl_start_int} {1} {\l_kgl_end_int} \kgl_use:n
+     {\l__kgl_start_int} {1} {\l__kgl_end_int} \__kgl_use:n
   }
-\cs_new:Nn \kgl_use:n
-  {
-   \kgl_number:n {#1}
-   \bool_if:NT \g_kgl_makeindex_bool
+\cs_new:Nn \__kgl_use:n
+ {
+  \int_compare:nNnF { #1 } > { \seq_count:N \g__kgl_pars_seq }
+   { \__kgl_number:n {#1} }
+  \bool_if:NT \g__kgl_makeindex_bool
     {
-     \use:x { \exp_not:N \index{ \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_words_seq {#1} } }
+     \use:x { \exp_not:N \index{ \seq_item:Nn \g__kgl_words_seq {#1} } }
     }
-   \seq_item:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#1}
-  }
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_newpara:n
-  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_kgl_pars_seq {#1\kgl_par:} }
-\cs_new_protected:Nn \kgl_newword:n
-  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g_kgl_words_seq {#1} }
+  \seq_item:Nn \g__kgl_pars_seq {#1}
+ }
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_newpara:n
+  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g__kgl_pars_seq {#1\__kgl_par:} }
+\cs_new_protected:Nn \__kgl_newword:n
+  { \seq_gput_right:Nn \g__kgl_words_seq {#1} }
 \group_begin:
 \char_set_catcode_space:n {`\ }
-\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the Ideal of
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the Ideal of
 practical reason is a representation of, as far as I know, the things
 in themselves; as I have shown elsewhere, the phenomena should only be
 used as a canon for our understanding. The paralogisms of practical
@@ -140,7 +131,7 @@ Human reason depends on our sense perceptions, by means of analytic
 unity. There can be no doubt that the objects in space and time are
 what first give rise to human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Let us suppose that the noumena have nothing to do
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Let us suppose that the noumena have nothing to do
 with necessity, since knowledge of the Categories is a
 posteriori. Hume tells us that the transcendental unity of
 apperception can not take account of the discipline of natural reason,
@@ -154,7 +145,7 @@ Ideal, the Antinomies; so, the transcendental aesthetic is just as
 necessary as our experience. By means of the Ideal, our sense
 perceptions are by their very nature contradictory.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, the things
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, the things
 in themselves (and it remains a mystery why this is the case) are a
 representation of time. Our concepts have lying before them the
 paralogisms of natural reason, but our a posteriori concepts have
@@ -170,7 +161,7 @@ for our sense perceptions, and time occupies part of the sphere of the
 Ideal concerning the existence of the objects in space and time in
 general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, what we have alone been able
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, what we have alone been able
 to show is that the objects in space and time would be falsified; what
 we have alone been able to show is that, our judgements are what first
 give rise to metaphysics. As I have shown elsewhere, Aristotle tells
@@ -188,7 +179,7 @@ This could not be passed over in a complete system of transcendental
 philosophy, but in a merely critical essay the simple mention of the
 fact may suffice.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Therefore, we can deduce that the objects in space and
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Therefore, we can deduce that the objects in space and
 time (and I assert, however, that this is the case) have lying before
 them the objects in space and time. Because of our necessary ignorance
 of the conditions, it must not be supposed that, then, formal logic
@@ -213,7 +204,7 @@ misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our understanding
 rise to the architectonic of pure reason, as is evident upon close
 examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are what first give rise to
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are what first give rise to
 reason, as is proven in the ontological manuals. By virtue of natural
 reason, let us suppose that the transcendental unity of apperception
 abstracts from all content of knowledge; in view of these
@@ -229,7 +220,7 @@ treated like metaphysics. By means of the Ideal, it must not be
 supposed that the objects in space and time are what first give rise
 to the employment of pure reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, to avoid all
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, to avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, on the contrary, the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions is a
 representation of our inductive judgements, yet the things in
@@ -252,7 +243,7 @@ suppose that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of
 necessity.  But the proof of this is a task from which we can here be
 absolved.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the Antinomies exclude the possibility of, on
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the Antinomies exclude the possibility of, on
 the other hand, natural causes, as will easily be shown in the next
 section.  Still, the reader should be careful to observe that the
 phenomena have lying before them the intelligible objects in space and
@@ -272,7 +263,7 @@ but natural causes would thereby be made to contradict the Antinomies.
 The transcendental unity of apperception constitutes the whole content
 for the noumena, by means of analytic unity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In all theoretical sciences, the paralogisms of human
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In all theoretical sciences, the paralogisms of human
 reason would be falsified, as is proven in the ontological manuals.
 The architectonic of human reason is what first gives rise to the
 Categories.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the paralogisms
@@ -282,7 +273,7 @@ constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must
 be known a posteriori.  Human reason occupies part of the sphere of
 our experience concerning the existence of the phenomena in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, our ampliative judgements
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, our ampliative judgements
 would thereby be made to contradict, in all theoretical sciences, the
 pure employment of the discipline of human reason.  Because of our
 necessary ignorance of the conditions, Hume tells us that the
@@ -296,7 +287,7 @@ knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori.  Let us suppose that the
 Ideal occupies part of the sphere of our knowledge concerning the
 existence of the phenomena in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, what we have alone been
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, what we have alone been
 able to show is that, in so far as this expounds the universal rules
 of our a posteriori concepts, the architectonic of natural reason can
 be treated like the architectonic of practical reason.  Thus, our
@@ -310,7 +301,7 @@ study of pure logic, our knowledge is just as necessary as, thus,
 space.  By virtue of practical reason, the noumena, still, stand in
 need to the pure employment of the things in themselves.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that the
 objects in space and time are the clue to the discovery of, certainly,
 our a priori knowledge, by means of analytic unity.  Our faculties
 abstract from all content of knowledge; for these reasons, the
@@ -334,7 +325,7 @@ reason, in other words, is what first gives rise to the transcendental
 aesthetic, yet our faculties have lying before them the architectonic
 of human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {However, we can deduce that our experience (and it
+\__kgl_newpara:n {However, we can deduce that our experience (and it
 must not be supposed that this is true) stands in need of our
 experience, as we have already seen.  On the other hand, it is not at
 all certain that necessity is a representation of, by means of the
@@ -348,7 +339,7 @@ writings of Galileo.  As I have elsewhere shown, natural causes, in
 respect of the intelligible character, exist in the objects in space
 and time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our ideas, in the case of the Ideal of pure reason,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our ideas, in the case of the Ideal of pure reason,
 are by their very nature contradictory.  The objects in space and time
 can not take account of our understanding, and philosophy excludes the
 possibility of, certainly, space.  I assert that our ideas, by means
@@ -363,7 +354,7 @@ has lying before it our experience.  This could not be passed over in
 a complete system of transcendental philosophy, but in a merely
 critical essay the simple mention of the fact may suffice.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of our faculties is a posteriori, pure
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of our faculties is a posteriori, pure
 logic teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, indeed,
 the architectonic of human reason.  As we have already seen, we can
 deduce that, irrespective of all empirical conditions, the Ideal of
@@ -378,7 +369,7 @@ show is that the objects in space and time exclude the possibility of
 our judgements, as will easily be shown in the next section.  This is
 what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Time (and let us suppose that this is true) is the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Time (and let us suppose that this is true) is the
 clue to the discovery of the Categories, as we have already seen.
 Since knowledge of our faculties is a priori, to avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the empirical objects
@@ -392,7 +383,7 @@ however, formal logic; in the case of the manifold, the objects in
 space and time can be treated like the paralogisms of natural reason.
 This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between pure logic and natural
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between pure logic and natural
 causes, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that,
 even as this relates to the thing in itself, pure reason constitutes
 the whole content for our concepts, but the Ideal of practical reason
@@ -410,7 +401,7 @@ to do with our judgements.  In my present remarks I am referring to
 the transcendental aesthetic only in so far as it is founded on
 analytic principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of our a priori knowledge, our
+\__kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of our a priori knowledge, our
 faculties have nothing to do with our faculties.  Pure reason (and we
 can deduce that this is true) would thereby be made to contradict the
 phenomena.  As we have already seen, let us suppose that the
@@ -422,7 +413,7 @@ However, it is obvious that time can be treated like our a priori
 knowledge, by means of analytic unity.  Philosophy has nothing to do
 with natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By means of analysis, our faculties stand in need to,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By means of analysis, our faculties stand in need to,
 indeed, the empirical objects in space and time.  The objects in space
 and time, for these reasons, have nothing to do with our
 understanding.  There can be no doubt that the noumena can not take
@@ -432,7 +423,7 @@ the Ideal of human reason is what first gives rise to, therefore,
 space, yet our sense perceptions exist in the discipline of practical
 reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal can not take account of, so far as I know,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal can not take account of, so far as I know,
 our faculties.  As we have already seen, the objects in space and time
 are what first give rise to the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions; for these reasons, our a posteriori concepts
@@ -444,7 +435,7 @@ sense perceptions.  I assert, thus, that our faculties would thereby
 be made to contradict, indeed, our knowledge.  Natural causes, so
 regarded, exist in our judgements.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions may not contradict itself, but it is still possible that it
 may be in contradictions with, then, applied logic.  The employment of
 the noumena stands in need of space; with the sole exception of our
@@ -463,7 +454,7 @@ sphere of philosophy concerning the existence of the transcendental
 objects in space and time in general, as is proven in the ontological
 manuals.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, in the case
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, in the case
 of philosophy, is a body of demonstrated science, and some of it must
 be known a posteriori.  Thus, the objects in space and time, insomuch
 as the discipline of practical reason relies on the Antinomies,
@@ -481,7 +472,7 @@ that our a priori knowledge is just as necessary as our ideas.  In my
 present remarks I am referring to time only in so far as it is founded
 on disjunctive principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The discipline of pure reason is what first gives rise
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The discipline of pure reason is what first gives rise
 to the Categories, but applied logic is the clue to the discovery of
 our sense perceptions.  The never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the
@@ -497,7 +488,7 @@ obvious that this is true) stands in need of the phenomena; for these
 reasons, our sense perceptions stand in need to the manifold.  Our
 ideas are what first give rise to the paralogisms.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves have lying before them the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves have lying before them the
 Antinomies, by virtue of human reason.  By means of the transcendental
 aesthetic, let us suppose that the discipline of natural reason
 depends on natural causes, because of the relation between the
@@ -511,7 +502,7 @@ Transcendental Deduction in thought, or does it present itself to me?
 By means of analysis, the phenomena can not take account of natural
 causes.  This is not something we are in a position to establish.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the things in themselves are a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the things in themselves are a
 posteriori, there can be no doubt that, when thus treated as our
 understanding, pure reason depends on, still, the Ideal of natural
 reason, and our speculative judgements constitute a body of
@@ -533,7 +524,7 @@ paralogisms of natural reason, the paralogisms of human reason, in the
 study of the Transcendental Deduction, would be falsified, but
 metaphysics abstracts from all content of knowledge.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of natural causes are disjunctive, the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of natural causes are disjunctive, the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions is the key
 to understanding, in particular, the noumena.  By means of analysis,
 the Categories (and it is not at all certain that this is the case)
@@ -555,7 +546,7 @@ necessity, the things in themselves, because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions.  But to this matter no answer is
 possible.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of the objects in space and time are
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since all of the objects in space and time are
 synthetic, it remains a mystery why, even as this relates to our
 experience, our a priori concepts should only be used as a canon for
 our judgements, but the phenomena should only be used as a canon for
@@ -571,7 +562,7 @@ take account of our faculties, as is proven in the ontological
 manuals.  Certainly, it remains a mystery why the manifold is just as
 necessary as the manifold, as is evident upon close examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, what we have alone been able to
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, what we have alone been able to
 show is that the architectonic of practical reason is the clue to the
 discovery of, still, the manifold, by means of analysis.  Since
 knowledge of the objects in space and time is a priori, the things in
@@ -590,7 +581,7 @@ character, teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the
 thing in itself; however, the objects in space and time exist in
 natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, however, that our a posteriori concepts (and
+\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, however, that our a posteriori concepts (and
 it is obvious that this is the case) would thereby be made to
 contradict the discipline of practical reason; however, the things in
 themselves, however, constitute the whole content of philosophy.  As
@@ -617,7 +608,7 @@ to the discovery of our understanding.  Because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions, I assert that, indeed, the architectonic
 of natural reason, as I have elsewhere shown, would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, the transcendental unity of
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, the transcendental unity of
 apperception has nothing to do with the Antinomies.  As will easily be
 shown in the next section, our sense perceptions are by their very
 nature contradictory, but our ideas, with the sole exception of human
@@ -629,7 +620,7 @@ judgements are a priori.  We can deduce that, indeed, the objects in
 space and time can not take account of the Transcendental Deduction,
 but our knowledge, on the other hand, would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, our understanding is the clue
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, our understanding is the clue
 to the discovery of necessity.  On the other hand, the Ideal of pure
 reason is a body of demonstrated science, and all of it must be known
 a posteriori, as is evident upon close examination.  It is obvious
@@ -640,7 +631,7 @@ so far as I know, natural causes.  In the case of space, our
 experience depends on the Ideal of natural reason, as we have already
 seen.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {For these reasons, space is the key to understanding
+\__kgl_newpara:n {For these reasons, space is the key to understanding
 the thing in itself.  Our sense perceptions abstract from all content
 of a priori knowledge, but the phenomena can never, as a whole,
 furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like time, they are
@@ -653,7 +644,7 @@ contradict, so far as regards the thing in itself, the Transcendental
 Deduction; in natural theology, the noumena are the clue to the
 discovery of, so far as I know, the Transcendental Deduction.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
+\__kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that, in respect of the intelligible character, the
 transcendental aesthetic depends on the objects in space and time, yet
 the manifold is the clue to the discovery of the Transcendental
@@ -670,7 +661,7 @@ faculties can be treated like our concepts.  As is shown in the
 writings of Galileo, the transcendental unity of apperception stands
 in need of, in the case of necessity, our speculative judgements.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena (and it is obvious that this is the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena (and it is obvious that this is the
 case) prove the validity of our sense perceptions; in natural
 theology, philosophy teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the
 content of the transcendental objects in space and time.  In natural
@@ -685,7 +676,7 @@ has lying before it the things in themselves.  Aristotle tells us
 that, in accordance with the principles of the phenomena, the
 Antinomies are a representation of metaphysics.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves can not take account of the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves can not take account of the
 Transcendental Deduction.  By means of analytic unity, it is obvious
 that, that is to say, our sense perceptions, in all theoretical
 sciences, can not take account of the thing in itself, yet the
@@ -697,7 +688,7 @@ possibility of the Ideal.  It must not be supposed that the things in
 themselves are a representation of, in accordance with the principles
 of philosophy, our sense perceptions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, philosophy is
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, philosophy is
 the mere result of the power of pure logic, a blind but indispensable
 function of the soul; however, the phenomena can never, as a whole,
 furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like general logic,
@@ -716,7 +707,7 @@ section, the thing in itself, with the sole exception of the manifold,
 abstracts from all content of a posteriori knowledge.  The question of
 this matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By means of the transcendental aesthetic, it remains a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By means of the transcendental aesthetic, it remains a
 mystery why the phenomena (and it is not at all certain that this is
 the case) are the clue to the discovery of the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions.  In all theoretical sciences,
@@ -733,7 +724,7 @@ things in themselves, therefore, are by their very nature
 contradictory, by virtue of natural reason.  This is the sense in
 which it is to be understood in this work.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, let us suppose
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, let us suppose
 that, in accordance with the principles of time, our a priori concepts
 are the clue to the discovery of philosophy.  By means of analysis, to
 avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, in
@@ -752,7 +743,7 @@ Ideal of practical reason relies on the noumena, the Categories prove
 the validity of philosophy, yet pure reason is the key to
 understanding the Categories.  This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Natural causes, when thus treated as the things in
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Natural causes, when thus treated as the things in
 themselves, abstract from all content of a posteriori knowledge, by
 means of analytic unity.  Our a posteriori knowledge, in other words,
 is the key to understanding the Antinomies.  As we have already seen,
@@ -774,7 +765,7 @@ that natural reason is a representation of, insomuch as space relies
 on the paralogisms, the Transcendental Deduction, by means of
 analysis.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Ideal constitutes the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Ideal constitutes the
 whole content for the transcendental unity of apperception.  By means
 of analytic unity, let us suppose that, when thus treated as space,
 our synthetic judgements, therefore, would be falsified, and the
@@ -794,7 +785,7 @@ still, the Categories, when thus treated as the paralogisms, exist in
 the employment of the Antinomies.  Let us apply this to our
 experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, thus, that the discipline of natural reason
+\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, thus, that the discipline of natural reason
 can be treated like the transcendental aesthetic, since some of the
 Categories are speculative.  In the case of transcendental logic, our
 ideas prove the validity of our understanding, as any dedicated reader
@@ -810,7 +801,7 @@ are the mere results of the power of the Transcendental Deduction, a
 blind but indispensable function of the soul, as is proven in the
 ontological manuals.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The noumena have nothing to do with, thus, the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The noumena have nothing to do with, thus, the
 Antinomies.  What we have alone been able to show is that the things
 in themselves constitute the whole content of human reason, as is
 proven in the ontological manuals.  The noumena (and to avoid all
@@ -826,7 +817,7 @@ its totality hypothetical principles, and the empirical objects in
 space and time are what first give rise to, in all theoretical
 sciences, our a posteriori concepts.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding excludes the possibility of
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding excludes the possibility of
 practical reason.  Our faculties stand in need to, consequently, the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions; still, the
 employment of necessity is what first gives rise to general logic.
@@ -842,7 +833,7 @@ exclude the possibility of the discipline of pure reason, yet the
 empirical objects in space and time prove the validity of natural
 causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between space and the noumena,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between space and the noumena,
 our experience is by its very nature contradictory.  It is obvious
 that natural causes constitute the whole content of the transcendental
 unity of apperception, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.  By
@@ -862,7 +853,7 @@ representation of the transcendental aesthetic.  In my present remarks
 I am referring to the pure employment of our disjunctive judgements
 only in so far as it is founded on inductive principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our sense
+\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our sense
 perceptions are the clue to the discovery of our understanding; in
 natural theology, necessity, in all theoretical sciences, occupies
 part of the sphere of the transcendental unity of apperception
@@ -877,7 +868,7 @@ all content of a priori knowledge.  The phenomena (and it remains a
 mystery why this is the case) are just as necessary as the Ideal of
 human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our
 experience is the clue to the discovery of philosophy; in the study of
 space, the Categories are what first give rise to the transcendental
 aesthetic.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see, the reader should
@@ -894,7 +885,7 @@ that the phenomena (and it is not at all certain that this is the
 case) stand in need to the discipline of practical reason; thus, our
 knowledge, indeed, can not take account of our ideas.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the study of time, our concepts prove the validity
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In the study of time, our concepts prove the validity
 of, as I have elsewhere shown, our understanding, as any dedicated
 reader can clearly see.  As will easily be shown in the next section,
 the reader should be careful to observe that, so far as regards our
@@ -915,7 +906,7 @@ suppose that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of our
 ideas.  It remains a mystery why, then, the architectonic of practical
 reason proves the validity of, therefore, the noumena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The paralogisms of practical reason can be treated
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The paralogisms of practical reason can be treated
 like the paralogisms.  The objects in space and time, therefore, are
 what first give rise to the discipline of human reason; in all
 theoretical sciences, the things in themselves (and we can deduce that
@@ -933,7 +924,7 @@ contradict philosophy, yet our a posteriori concepts, insomuch as the
 Ideal of pure reason relies on the intelligible objects in space and
 time, are by their very nature contradictory.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Time, on the contrary, can never furnish a true and
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Time, on the contrary, can never furnish a true and
 demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental aesthetic, it
 constitutes the whole content for ampliative principles, yet natural
 reason, even as this relates to philosophy, proves the validity of the
@@ -952,7 +943,7 @@ excludes the possibility of the manifold, as we have already seen.
 Consequently, the Ideal of pure reason can be treated like the
 phenomena.  Let us apply this to the Transcendental Deduction.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that our a
 posteriori concepts (and it is obvious that this is the case) are what
 first give rise to the transcendental unity of apperception.  In the
 case of necessity, the reader should be careful to observe that
@@ -969,7 +960,7 @@ supposed that our ideas have lying before them metaphysics;
 consequently, the architectonic of pure reason, in all theoretical
 sciences, would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Transcendental Deduction stands in need of the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The Transcendental Deduction stands in need of the
 Ideal of pure reason, and the noumena, for these reasons, are by their
 very nature contradictory.  The objects in space and time have lying
 before them our ideas.  The transcendental unity of apperception,
@@ -984,7 +975,7 @@ natural causes exclude the possibility of, consequently, metaphysics,
 and the discipline of pure reason abstracts from all content of a
 priori knowledge.  We thus have a pure synthesis of apprehension.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
 what we have alone been able to show is that formal logic can not take
 account of the Categories; in the study of the transcendental
 aesthetic, philosophy can thereby determine in its totality the
@@ -1002,7 +993,7 @@ so far as regards the thing in itself, the Ideal, as any dedicated
 reader can clearly see.  This is the sense in which it is to be
 understood in this work.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, in respect of the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, in respect of the
 intelligible character, the Antinomies (and we can deduce that this is
 the case) constitute the whole content of the phenomena, yet the
 Categories exist in natural causes.  The Ideal of natural reason, when
@@ -1018,7 +1009,7 @@ can deduce that, when thus treated as the phenomena, our sense
 perceptions (and there can be no doubt that this is the case) are what
 first give rise to the discipline of practical reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the reader should be careful to observe that the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Thus, the reader should be careful to observe that the
 noumena would thereby be made to contradict necessity, because of our
 necessary ignorance of the conditions.  Consequently, our sense
 perceptions are just as necessary as the architectonic of natural
@@ -1036,7 +1027,7 @@ be known a priori; in view of these considerations, the phenomena can
 not take account of, for these reasons, the transcendental unity of
 apperception.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that, for
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that, for
 example, pure logic depends on the transcendental unity of
 apperception.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see, our a priori
 concepts are what first give rise to the Categories.  Hume tells us
@@ -1053,7 +1044,7 @@ content of, consequently, the transcendental unity of apperception, as
 will easily be shown in the next section.  We thus have a pure
 synthesis of apprehension.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Antinomies have nothing to do with our faculties.
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The Antinomies have nothing to do with our faculties.
 As is shown in the writings of Hume, we can deduce that, on the
 contrary, the empirical objects in space and time prove the validity
 of our ideas.  The manifold may not contradict itself, but it is still
@@ -1072,7 +1063,7 @@ perceptions, a blind but indispensable function of the soul.  As I
 have elsewhere shown, philosophy proves the validity of our sense
 perceptions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
 phenomena, so far as I know, exist in the noumena; however, our
 concepts, however, exclude the possibility of our judgements.  Galileo
 tells us that our a posteriori knowledge would thereby be made to
@@ -1094,7 +1085,7 @@ empirical conditions and the paralogisms.  This distinction must have
 some ground in the nature of the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
+\__kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that time excludes the possibility of the discipline of human
 reason; in the study of practical reason, the manifold has nothing to
 do with time.  Because of the relation between our a priori knowledge
@@ -1109,7 +1100,7 @@ of, thus, the manifold.  I assert that space is what first gives rise
 to the paralogisms of pure reason.  As is shown in the writings of
 Hume, space has nothing to do with, for example, necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the Ideal of practical reason, even
+\__kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the Ideal of practical reason, even
 as this relates to our knowledge, is a representation of the
 discipline of human reason.  The things in themselves are just as
 necessary as our understanding.  The noumena prove the validity of the
@@ -1121,7 +1112,7 @@ ideas are the mere results of the power of the Ideal of pure reason, a
 blind but indispensable function of the soul.  The divisions are thus
 provided; all that is required is to fill them.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions can be treated like the objects in space and time.  What we
 have alone been able to show is that, then, the transcendental
 aesthetic, in reference to ends, would thereby be made to contradict
@@ -1134,7 +1125,7 @@ theoretical sciences, to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that the things in themselves are a representation of, in
 other words, necessity, as is evident upon close examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, it remains a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, it remains a
 mystery why our experience is the mere result of the power of the
 discipline of human reason, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul.  For these reasons, the employment of the thing in itself
@@ -1155,7 +1146,7 @@ the transcendental unity of apperception can not take account of,
 however, our faculties.  But at present we shall turn our attention to
 the thing in itself.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, we can deduce
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, we can deduce
 that the transcendental unity of apperception depends on the Ideal of
 practical reason.  Certainly, it is obvious that the Antinomies, in
 accordance with the principles of the objects in space and time,
@@ -1181,7 +1172,7 @@ paralogisms of natural reason have nothing to do with the thing in
 itself, but the paralogisms prove the validity of transcendental
 logic.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that, then, the noumena are just as
+\__kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that, then, the noumena are just as
 necessary as, so regarded, the practical employment of the objects in
 space and time.  It is obvious that the manifold has nothing to do
 with our ideas; with the sole exception of the employment of the
@@ -1202,7 +1193,7 @@ perceptions.  To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain
 that our ideas exclude the possibility of, irrespective of all
 empirical conditions, our ideas.  Let us apply this to space.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It remains a mystery why our sense perceptions prove
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It remains a mystery why our sense perceptions prove
 the validity of our a priori concepts.  The objects in space and time,
 then, exist in metaphysics; therefore, the things in themselves can
 not take account of the transcendental aesthetic.  The Ideal of pure
@@ -1213,7 +1204,7 @@ as, in all theoretical sciences, our knowledge.  The things in
 themselves constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of
 this body must be known a posteriori.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, the
 Transcendental Deduction exists in the Ideal.  To avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that pure reason (and it
 is obvious that this is true) is the key to understanding the
@@ -1234,7 +1225,7 @@ the transcendental aesthetic, thus, exists in our faculties.  Our
 faculties are just as necessary as the Categories, yet the manifold
 has lying before it, certainly, our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the never-ending regress in the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the never-ending regress in the
 series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it is
 still possible that it may be in contradictions with the architectonic
 of practical reason.  The objects in space and time, so regarded,
@@ -1248,7 +1239,7 @@ our inductive judgements.  Still, the architectonic of pure reason is
 just as necessary as the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Thus, transcendental logic (and I assert, for these
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Thus, transcendental logic (and I assert, for these
 reasons, that this is true) depends on the Antinomies.  Still, general
 logic (and it remains a mystery why this is true) is what first gives
 rise to the objects in space and time, because of the relation between
@@ -1267,7 +1258,7 @@ constitute the whole content of, for these reasons, the noumena.
 However, the objects in space and time are what first give rise to our
 understanding, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the Antinomies have nothing to do
+\__kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the Antinomies have nothing to do
 with pure reason, because of our necessary ignorance of the
 conditions.  Our speculative judgements are what first give rise to
 the Categories.  Time is the key to understanding natural causes, as
@@ -1280,7 +1271,7 @@ perceptions constitute the whole content of the manifold.  In natural
 theology, the discipline of natural reason, on the other hand, would
 be falsified, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the discipline of human reason, it is
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the discipline of human reason, it is
 obvious that the phenomena, still, are the mere results of the power
 of the practical employment of the Transcendental Deduction, a blind
 but indispensable function of the soul, by means of analysis.  As any
@@ -1304,7 +1295,7 @@ thereby be made to contradict, so regarded, the Ideal of natural
 reason.  Hume tells us that our ideas abstract from all content of a
 posteriori knowledge, as is evident upon close examination.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The manifold is a representation of the phenomena.
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The manifold is a representation of the phenomena.
 Our judgements constitute the whole content of, on the other hand, the
 things in themselves, as will easily be shown in the next section.  By
 means of analytic unity, the phenomena, in the full sense of these
@@ -1314,7 +1305,7 @@ pure reason (and there can be no doubt that this is true) is the key
 to understanding time.  In the study of formal logic, the paralogisms
 of pure reason are the clue to the discovery of, thus, the manifold.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the never-ending regress in
+\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions may not contradict itself, but it
 is still possible that it may be in contradictions with, indeed, our
 sense perceptions.  As is proven in the ontological manuals, the
@@ -1335,7 +1326,7 @@ the mere results of the power of time, a blind but indispensable
 function of the soul.  The divisions are thus provided; all that is
 required is to fill them.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Antinomies are a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, the Antinomies are a
 representation of the Categories.  Necessity stands in need of the
 Antinomies.  By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies have lying
 before them the Ideal of pure reason; on the other hand, the
@@ -1353,7 +1344,7 @@ nothing to do with disjunctive principles.  But we have fallen short
 of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of
 necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the paralogisms
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the paralogisms
 abstract from all content of a posteriori knowledge.  Consequently,
 the transcendental aesthetic, in reference to ends, occupies part of
 the sphere of metaphysics concerning the existence of the Categories
@@ -1372,7 +1363,7 @@ necessary ignorance of the conditions, Hume tells us that the
 manifold, irrespective of all empirical conditions, is what first
 gives rise to space.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, our experience
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, our experience
 occupies part of the sphere of the Ideal concerning the existence of
 the objects in space and time in general, as will easily be shown in
 the next section.  It must not be supposed that our ideas (and it
@@ -1390,7 +1381,7 @@ far as I know, can never furnish a true and demonstrated science,
 because, like the architectonic of pure reason, it is just as
 necessary as a priori principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
+\__kgl_newpara:n {To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that philosophy can not take account of our sense perceptions;
 in the study of the discipline of natural reason, our experience, in
 the study of the architectonic of practical reason, is the mere result
@@ -1406,7 +1397,7 @@ of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.  Human reason (and there
 can be no doubt that this is true) depends on our understanding, but
 the Ideal can thereby determine in its totality metaphysics.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
 posteriori, general logic, in respect of the intelligible character,
 is by its very nature contradictory.  By means of analytic unity, it
 is not at all certain that space, insomuch as our understanding relies
@@ -1424,7 +1415,7 @@ the principles of the transcendental unity of apperception, occupies
 part of the sphere of our understanding concerning the existence of
 the phenomena in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Human reason (and we can deduce that this is true)
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Human reason (and we can deduce that this is true)
 proves the validity of the architectonic of natural reason.  To avoid
 all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the employment of
 the things in themselves can not take account of the phenomena.  The
@@ -1439,7 +1430,7 @@ regress in the series of empirical conditions.  Since knowledge of our
 ideas is a posteriori, the phenomena are a representation of the
 phenomena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Necessity, as I have elsewhere shown, is the mere
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Necessity, as I have elsewhere shown, is the mere
 result of the power of the architectonic of practical reason, a blind
 but indispensable function of the soul.  The paralogisms of pure
 reason are the clue to the discovery of the practical employment of
@@ -1454,7 +1445,7 @@ of natural reason, the transcendental aesthetic can be treated like
 general logic, yet the objects in space and time are just as necessary
 as the noumena.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, let us suppose that
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, let us suppose that
 the Categories exclude the possibility of the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions.  The manifold occupies part of the
 sphere of the thing in itself concerning the existence of the things
@@ -1471,7 +1462,7 @@ certain that this is true) stands in need of the things in themselves.
 Philosophy is the key to understanding, thus, our sense perceptions.
 This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding would thereby be made to contradict,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding would thereby be made to contradict,
 so far as regards the Ideal, necessity.  Our faculties, as I have
 elsewhere shown, are the mere results of the power of time, a blind
 but indispensable function of the soul.  Time, with the sole exception
@@ -1488,7 +1479,7 @@ rise to the paralogisms, but our judgements are the clue to the
 discovery of, in the study of the thing in itself, the discipline of
 practical reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our a priori concepts, with the sole exception of our
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our a priori concepts, with the sole exception of our
 experience, have lying before them our judgements.  It must not be
 supposed that the Antinomies are a representation of the discipline of
 human reason, by means of analytic unity.  In the study of the
@@ -1515,7 +1506,7 @@ furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the
 transcendental unity of apperception, they exclude the possibility of
 hypothetical principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our faculties are speculative, our ideas
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our faculties are speculative, our ideas
 should only be used as a canon for time.  With the sole exception of
 the manifold, our concepts exclude the possibility of the practical
 employment of metaphysics, by means of analysis.  Aristotle tells us
@@ -1534,7 +1525,7 @@ discovery of natural causes, by means of analysis.  Let us suppose
 that, in other words, the manifold, that is to say, abstracts from all
 content of knowledge.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Aristotle
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Aristotle
 tells us that the transcendental unity of apperception can be treated
 like the discipline of pure reason; in the case of our understanding,
 our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the noumena.  The
@@ -1550,7 +1541,7 @@ aesthetic can never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because,
 like the transcendental aesthetic, it has nothing to do with
 ampliative principles.  Transcendental logic exists in our faculties.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the objects in space and
+\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that the objects in space and
 time have nothing to do with our judgements.  The architectonic of
 human reason has nothing to do with the noumena.  What we have alone
 been able to show is that natural causes have nothing to do with,
@@ -1568,7 +1559,7 @@ exception of the transcendental aesthetic, the thing in itself (and it
 remains a mystery why this is true) is the clue to the discovery of
 our speculative judgements.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the Ideal is a body of
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the Ideal is a body of
 demonstrated science, and some of it must be known a priori, as is
 evident upon close examination.  Our ideas abstract from all content
 of knowledge, and the phenomena have nothing to do with, then,
@@ -1586,7 +1577,7 @@ analytic unity.  It is not at all certain that the architectonic of
 practical reason, then, is what first gives rise to necessity; still,
 our concepts stand in need to the objects in space and time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that our sense perceptions are
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that our sense perceptions are
 the clue to the discovery of the Antinomies.  As will easily be shown
 in the next section, our experience, in particular, excludes the
 possibility of natural causes, yet the architectonic of human reason
@@ -1605,7 +1596,7 @@ content for practical reason.  But we have fallen short of the
 necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we speak of the
 transcendental aesthetic.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, when
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, when
 thus treated as the phenomena, the transcendental unity of
 apperception can thereby determine in its totality the Ideal of human
 reason.  There can be no doubt that natural causes can not take
@@ -1623,7 +1614,7 @@ consequently, the architectonic of natural reason (and what we have
 alone been able to show is that this is true) is the clue to the
 discovery of the objects in space and time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our ideas
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our ideas
 would thereby be made to contradict, in natural theology, the objects
 in space and time.  In all theoretical sciences, it remains a mystery
 why the employment of our understanding has nothing to do with the
@@ -1641,7 +1632,7 @@ necessity; on the other hand, philosophy occupies part of the sphere
 of the Transcendental Deduction concerning the existence of the
 intelligible objects in space and time in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Still, time is by its very nature contradictory.  The
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Still, time is by its very nature contradictory.  The
 paralogisms of practical reason constitute a body of demonstrated
 doctrine, and none of this body must be known a priori; for these
 reasons, the noumena are the mere results of the power of the
@@ -1656,7 +1647,7 @@ the discovery of problematic principles, since knowledge of the
 objects in space and time is a priori.  The Categories are what first
 give rise to the Transcendental Deduction.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our faculties, in the full sense of these terms, exist
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our faculties, in the full sense of these terms, exist
 in the noumena, because of the relation between space and the
 phenomena.  Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, the
 paralogisms of practical reason are a representation of, indeed, our
@@ -1676,7 +1667,7 @@ in contradictions with disjunctive principles; by means of our
 knowledge, formal logic would thereby be made to contradict the
 noumena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our a posteriori concepts are synthetic,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our a posteriori concepts are synthetic,
 applied logic has nothing to do with, for example, the noumena.  With
 the sole exception of philosophy, the Ideal of practical reason is
 what first gives rise to our ideas, as is evident upon close
@@ -1698,7 +1689,7 @@ objects in space and time can not take account of the noumena, but the
 empirical objects in space and time, with the sole exception of
 metaphysics, exist in the empirical objects in space and time.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the reader should be careful to
+\__kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the reader should be careful to
 observe that the Transcendental Deduction can never furnish a true and
 demonstrated science, because, like our experience, it would thereby
 be made to contradict synthetic principles.  The pure employment of
@@ -1718,7 +1709,7 @@ perceptions is a priori.  This could not be passed over in a complete
 system of transcendental philosophy, but in a merely critical essay
 the simple mention of the fact may suffice.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our sense perceptions are just as necessary as the
 employment of the never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions, but our a priori concepts can never, as a whole, furnish a
 true and demonstrated science, because, like necessity, they would
@@ -1736,7 +1727,7 @@ Antinomies; certainly, the employment of our sense perceptions
 abstracts from all content of a priori knowledge.  The paralogisms of
 pure reason should only be used as a canon for time.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, I assert that the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, I assert that the
 paralogisms, for example, would be falsified; however, our inductive
 judgements constitute the whole content of the discipline of natural
 reason.  The noumena constitute the whole content of the noumena.  The
@@ -1757,7 +1748,7 @@ perceptions are inductive, we can deduce that the manifold abstracts
 from all content of knowledge; on the other hand, our faculties should
 only be used as a canon for the pure employment of the Categories.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that our ideas have lying before
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that our ideas have lying before
 them the phenomena.  In the study of the employment of the objects in
 space and time, it is not at all certain that the transcendental
 aesthetic teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, so
@@ -1776,7 +1767,7 @@ of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, the reader should be
 careful to observe that, indeed, the transcendental aesthetic, still,
 exists in natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the objects in space and time are
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the objects in space and time are
 analytic, it remains a mystery why, in the full sense of these terms,
 the objects in space and time have lying before them the Categories,
 and our ideas (and let us suppose that this is the case) have lying
@@ -1795,7 +1786,7 @@ Transcendental Deduction stands in need of natural reason.  There can
 be no doubt that the manifold, when thus treated as the things in
 themselves, is by its very nature contradictory.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the never-ending regress in
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As I have elsewhere shown, the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions, in the study of the never-ending
 regress in the series of empirical conditions, occupies part of the
 sphere of the Transcendental Deduction concerning the existence of the
@@ -1812,7 +1803,7 @@ never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, when thus
 treated as the objects in space and time, constitutes the whole
 content for the Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that, so far as regards the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that, so far as regards the
 manifold and our ideas, the Categories are just as necessary as, in
 the study of the architectonic of pure reason, the discipline of human
 reason.  It must not be supposed that metaphysics is the mere result
@@ -1825,7 +1816,7 @@ the architectonic of natural reason, what we have alone been able to
 show is that our judgements constitute the whole content of, on the
 other hand, our inductive judgements, as we have already seen.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time should only be used as a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time should only be used as a
 canon for the phenomena.  By means of analysis, to avoid all
 misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that the noumena are just
 as necessary as pure logic; however, natural causes exist in the Ideal
@@ -1844,7 +1835,7 @@ never furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like
 philosophy, it has lying before it speculative principles.  This is
 the sense in which it is to be understood in this work.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Still, the Ideal is what first gives rise to, when
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Still, the Ideal is what first gives rise to, when
 thus treated as our ideas, the transcendental aesthetic.  As any
 dedicated reader can clearly see, it is obvious that natural causes
 exclude the possibility of natural causes; therefore, metaphysics is a
@@ -1868,7 +1859,7 @@ a blind but indispensable function of the soul; by means of the
 manifold, time is the key to understanding space.  By virtue of human
 reason, our speculative judgements have nothing to do with the Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic constitutes the whole content
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic constitutes the whole content
 for, for example, the never-ending regress in the series of empirical
 conditions.  It remains a mystery why, even as this relates to time,
 the Ideal excludes the possibility of the Categories, but natural
@@ -1887,7 +1878,7 @@ transcendental aesthetic, in the case of metaphysics, can be treated
 like necessity; for these reasons, the noumena exclude the possibility
 of the Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
 posteriori knowledge has lying before it the Categories, as is shown
 in the writings of Galileo.  Thus, the Categories are the mere results
 of the power of space, a blind but indispensable function of the soul.
@@ -1906,7 +1897,7 @@ stand in need to our judgements.  The Transcendental Deduction proves
 the validity of the things in themselves, and our sense perceptions
 would thereby be made to contradict our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Galileo tells
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, Galileo tells
 us that natural causes, so far as regards necessity, can never, as a
 whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the
 manifold, they prove the validity of ampliative principles.  Let us
@@ -1925,7 +1916,7 @@ contradictory.  With the sole exception of the architectonic of
 natural reason, there can be no doubt that our understanding would be
 falsified.  This is what chiefly concerns us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between philosophy and the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between philosophy and the
 objects in space and time, the Categories, in all theoretical
 sciences, are by their very nature contradictory.  What we have alone
 been able to show is that our knowledge is a representation of the
@@ -1944,7 +1935,7 @@ possibility of the paralogisms.  The thing in itself, in view of these
 considerations, is by its very nature contradictory.  Let us apply
 this to necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, our sense
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is proven in the ontological manuals, our sense
 perceptions, as I have elsewhere shown, should only be used as a canon
 for our ideas; in natural theology, the paralogisms, indeed, are by
 their very nature contradictory.  By virtue of practical reason, the
@@ -1962,7 +1953,7 @@ all certain that this is the case) are a representation of our ideas;
 still, time, with the sole exception of our experience, can be treated
 like our sense perceptions.  This is what chiefly concerns us.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Categories, as I have elsewhere shown, constitute
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The Categories, as I have elsewhere shown, constitute
 the whole content of necessity.  The transcendental unity of
 apperception is just as necessary as the transcendental objects in
 space and time.  Consequently, I assert that the thing in itself is a
@@ -1977,7 +1968,7 @@ relates to necessity, may not contradict itself, but it is still
 possible that it may be in contradictions with the architectonic of
 human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of the objects in space and time is a
 priori, it remains a mystery why, in reference to ends, the phenomena
 prove the validity of the paralogisms.  As is proven in the
 ontological manuals, the empirical objects in space and time would
@@ -2003,7 +1994,7 @@ writings of Galileo, the objects in space and time exclude the
 possibility of our ideas; thus, the objects in space and time, for
 these reasons, are the clue to the discovery of the Antinomies.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of the never-ending regress in
+\__kgl_newpara:n {With the sole exception of the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions, it is not at all certain that the
 noumena, in so far as this expounds the practical rules of the
 paralogisms of pure reason, can never, as a whole, furnish a true and
@@ -2022,7 +2013,7 @@ supposed that the manifold, as I have elsewhere shown, abstracts from
 all content of knowledge; in the study of the Ideal of practical
 reason, our concepts are the clue to the discovery of our experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
 Categories would be falsified.  Consequently, there can be no doubt
 that the noumena can not take account of, even as this relates to
 philosophy, the Antinomies, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.
@@ -2041,7 +2032,7 @@ manifold, that, indeed, the objects in space and time have lying
 before them our faculties, and the architectonic of natural reason
 stands in need of the things in themselves.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By means of analytic unity, the objects in space and
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By means of analytic unity, the objects in space and
 time (and there can be no doubt that this is the case) constitute the
 whole content of the Antinomies, but our ideas have lying before them
 the noumena.  The Ideal is the key to understanding, that is to say,
@@ -2058,7 +2049,7 @@ natural causes is a posteriori, the empirical objects in space and
 time have nothing to do with philosophy.  The divisions are thus
 provided; all that is required is to fill them.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, the noumena would
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In view of these considerations, the noumena would
 thereby be made to contradict, in view of these considerations, the
 paralogisms of natural reason.  Because of the relation between the
 discipline of pure reason and our sense perceptions, we can deduce
@@ -2075,7 +2066,7 @@ reason.  The reader should be careful to observe that the manifold,
 irrespective of all empirical conditions, is by its very nature
 contradictory.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that natural
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that natural
 causes (and to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain
 that this is the case) have lying before them necessity.  We can
 deduce that our a priori knowledge (and Galileo tells us that this is
@@ -2095,7 +2086,7 @@ objects in space and time, but the objects in space and time (and it
 is obvious that this is the case) are the clue to the discovery of the
 paralogisms.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, it is not at
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As any dedicated reader can clearly see, it is not at
 all certain that, on the contrary, the objects in space and time, in
 the case of space, stand in need to the objects in space and time, but
 the phenomena have lying before them the discipline of human reason.
@@ -2119,7 +2110,7 @@ posteriori; thus, time is the mere result of the power of the
 Transcendental Deduction, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul.  But this need not worry us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that, insomuch as the pure
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Aristotle tells us that, insomuch as the pure
 employment of the Categories relies on our ideas, the things in
 themselves are just as necessary as, in all theoretical sciences, the
 noumena.  Therefore, let us suppose that the phenomena occupy part of
@@ -2144,7 +2135,7 @@ other words, would thereby be made to contradict our understanding;
 still, the employment of the noumena is a representation of the
 Ideal.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the paralogisms of human reason are
+\__kgl_newpara:n {We can deduce that the paralogisms of human reason are
 a representation of, in the full sense of these terms, our experience.
 The thing in itself, in reference to ends, exists in our judgements.
 As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, let us suppose that, in
@@ -2161,7 +2152,7 @@ Consequently, it remains a mystery why our concepts abstract from all
 content of knowledge, since knowledge of the objects in space and time
 is a posteriori.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between practical reason and
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of the relation between practical reason and
 our problematic judgements, what we have alone been able to show is
 that, in respect of the intelligible character, our faculties,
 insomuch as our knowledge relies on the Categories, can be treated
@@ -2181,7 +2172,7 @@ not take account of, by means of space, our knowledge.  But we have
 fallen short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind
 when we speak of necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that space can not take
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It is not at all certain that space can not take
 account of natural causes.  The Transcendental Deduction can not take
 account of our a priori knowledge; as I have elsewhere shown, the
 objects in space and time (and let us suppose that this is the case)
@@ -2196,7 +2187,7 @@ can not take account of the noumena, but the paralogisms of natural
 reason, thus, abstract from all content of knowledge.  This is not
 something we are in a position to establish.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our ideas are inductive, our ideas
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of our ideas are inductive, our ideas
 constitute the whole content of the paralogisms; consequently, our
 faculties can not take account of metaphysics.  As will easily be
 shown in the next section, the Ideal, in reference to ends, may not
@@ -2220,7 +2211,7 @@ the power of pure reason, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul, yet the objects in space and time, with the sole exception of
 the manifold, exist in our ideas.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, it must not be supposed that the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In natural theology, it must not be supposed that the
 objects in space and time, so far as regards the manifold, should only
 be used as a canon for natural reason.  The manifold, so far as
 regards our a priori knowledge, teaches us nothing whatsoever
@@ -2239,7 +2230,7 @@ the Categories, but the things in themselves, however, constitute a
 body of demonstrated doctrine, and some of this body must be known a
 posteriori.  And similarly with all the others.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our speculative judgements, therefore, prove the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our speculative judgements, therefore, prove the
 validity of the transcendental unity of apperception.  Necessity is
 just as necessary as, that is to say, transcendental logic.  The
 reader should be careful to observe that the noumena (and it must not
@@ -2253,7 +2244,7 @@ discipline of human reason.  As any dedicated reader can clearly see,
 the paralogisms prove the validity of, as I have elsewhere shown, the
 architectonic of pure reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Space may not contradict itself, but it is still
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Space may not contradict itself, but it is still
 possible that it may be in contradictions with, for these reasons, the
 phenomena; with the sole exception of metaphysics, our ideas exclude
 the possibility of, in natural theology, the thing in itself.  What we
@@ -2278,7 +2269,7 @@ should only be used as a canon for our knowledge.  But we have fallen
 short of the necessary interconnection that we have in mind when we
 speak of necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time are the mere results of
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The objects in space and time are the mere results of
 the power of metaphysics, a blind but indispensable function of the
 soul; in the study of our a posteriori knowledge, the manifold, so far
 as I know, proves the validity of the Ideal.  Hume tells us that, so
@@ -2298,7 +2289,7 @@ of the Categories, because of our necessary ignorance of the
 conditions.  But we have fallen short of the necessary interconnection
 that we have in mind when we speak of the Categories.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions,
 it is not at all certain that, for example, the thing in itself (and
 the reader should be careful to observe that this is true) can not
 take account of our experience, and our concepts, in all theoretical
@@ -2310,7 +2301,7 @@ only be used as a canon for our a posteriori judgements.  Our
 understanding can be treated like the transcendental unity of
 apperception.  The Categories can be treated like space.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of our sense perceptions are hypothetical,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of our sense perceptions are hypothetical,
 philosophy proves the validity of natural causes; on the other hand,
 our experience, in other words, can never furnish a true and
 demonstrated science, because, like our experience, it depends on
@@ -2328,7 +2319,7 @@ experience, by virtue of natural reason.  Therefore, the noumena, in
 view of these considerations, are by their very nature contradictory,
 as will easily be shown in the next section.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the never-ending regress in the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {On the other hand, the never-ending regress in the
 series of empirical conditions stands in need of practical reason.  As
 will easily be shown in the next section, there can be no doubt that,
 in so far as this expounds the contradictory rules of the discipline
@@ -2342,7 +2333,7 @@ in the writings of Hume.  Certainly, what we have alone been able to
 show is that natural causes, in reference to ends, would be falsified.
 But this need not worry us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the objects in space and time are
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since some of the objects in space and time are
 speculative, let us suppose that our sense perceptions are the clue to
 the discovery of, in particular, our a posteriori knowledge.  Since
 knowledge of the transcendental objects in space and time is a
@@ -2364,7 +2355,7 @@ constitutes the whole content for, still, the intelligible objects in
 space and time, and space is the clue to the discovery of, in
 particular, our a posteriori concepts.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal of human reason has nothing to do with time.
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal of human reason has nothing to do with time.
 As we have already seen, Aristotle tells us that, so far as regards
 the Transcendental Deduction, the transcendental aesthetic, insomuch
 as the practical employment of the never-ending regress in the series
@@ -2383,7 +2374,7 @@ means of general logic, that the transcendental unity of apperception
 teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, consequently,
 the Antinomies, because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our concepts are inductive, there can be
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since all of our concepts are inductive, there can be
 no doubt that, in respect of the intelligible character, our ideas are
 the clue to the discovery of the transcendental unity of apperception,
 and the paralogisms of natural reason should only be used as a canon
@@ -2402,7 +2393,7 @@ Antinomies, yet the employment of the pure employment of our a
 posteriori concepts is what first gives rise to, in all theoretical
 sciences, the noumena.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori, it
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since knowledge of natural causes is a posteriori, it
 is obvious that the transcendental unity of apperception is the mere
 result of the power of the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions, a blind but indispensable function of the soul;
@@ -2419,7 +2410,7 @@ considerations, that our faculties, even as this relates to the thing
 in itself, occupy part of the sphere of the Transcendental Deduction
 concerning the existence of the Categories in general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain
 that, that is to say, the Transcendental Deduction is the clue to the
 discovery of, in particular, our knowledge, yet the thing in itself
 would thereby be made to contradict our faculties.  As is proven in
@@ -2438,7 +2429,7 @@ as this relates to the transcendental unity of apperception, the
 Categories, certainly, should only be used as a canon for the thing in
 itself.  This is not something we are in a position to establish.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that space depends on the things in
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that space depends on the things in
 themselves.  There can be no doubt that, in particular, the Ideal, in
 so far as this expounds the practical rules of the phenomena, is just
 as necessary as the transcendental unity of apperception.  There can
@@ -2449,7 +2440,7 @@ avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that our
 understanding (and to avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to
 explain that this is true) is a representation of the Antinomies.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies are a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of natural reason, the Antinomies are a
 representation of metaphysics; in the case of the practical employment
 of the transcendental aesthetic, the Categories are by their very
 nature contradictory.  It is not at all certain that the phenomena
@@ -2467,7 +2458,7 @@ nothing to do with our a posteriori knowledge.  There can be no doubt
 that metaphysics is a representation of the transcendental unity of
 apperception, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that our concepts, in accordance
+\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that our concepts, in accordance
 with the principles of the noumena, are by their very nature
 contradictory, as is shown in the writings of Galileo.  Space is what
 first gives rise to, in other words, the Antinomies, and space depends
@@ -2482,7 +2473,7 @@ metaphysics, on the contrary, occupies part of the sphere of the thing
 in itself concerning the existence of our synthetic judgements in
 general.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, I assert that,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, I assert that,
 so far as regards metaphysics, our knowledge proves the validity of,
 on the contrary, the manifold, yet the objects in space and time are
 what first give rise to, in the study of formal logic, the paralogisms
@@ -2499,7 +2490,7 @@ for these reasons, that our knowledge stands in need of the things in
 themselves, since knowledge of our faculties is a priori.  But this is
 to be dismissed as random groping.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding can not take account of our
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Our understanding can not take account of our
 faculties; certainly, the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions is what first gives rise to, therefore, the
 things in themselves.  It is not at all certain that, then, time
@@ -2516,7 +2507,7 @@ means of analysis.  Thus, the Categories would thereby be made to
 contradict the things in themselves, as any dedicated reader can
 clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are just as necessary as the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves are just as necessary as the
 never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions.  As any
 dedicated reader can clearly see, the architectonic of natural reason
 (and it remains a mystery why this is true) can thereby determine in
@@ -2534,7 +2525,7 @@ ignorance of the conditions.  It is not at all certain that the
 manifold stands in need of, for these reasons, the Antinomies, by
 virtue of human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of practical reason, there can be no doubt
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of practical reason, there can be no doubt
 that our experience, still, occupies part of the sphere of the
 manifold concerning the existence of our analytic judgements in
 general; as I have elsewhere shown, the Categories can never, as a
@@ -2559,7 +2550,7 @@ ontological manuals, the Ideal is a body of demonstrated science, and
 some of it must be known a priori.  This may be clear with an
 example.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, so far as
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The transcendental unity of apperception, so far as
 regards the Ideal of practical reason and the noumena, abstracts from
 all content of a posteriori knowledge, by virtue of human reason.  To
 avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain that, that is to
@@ -2580,7 +2571,7 @@ science, because, like the employment of philosophy, they have nothing
 to do with hypothetical principles.  Our ideas have nothing to do with
 the transcendental aesthetic.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {In the case of philosophy, the Transcendental
+\__kgl_newpara:n {In the case of philosophy, the Transcendental
 Deduction proves the validity of necessity, by means of analysis.  Our
 sense perceptions have lying before them, certainly, our experience.
 There can be no doubt that space (and it remains a mystery why this is
@@ -2594,7 +2585,7 @@ in the ontological manuals, space has nothing to do with, thus, our
 ideas, yet the things in themselves, in natural theology, can be
 treated like the transcendental aesthetic.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Galileo, it remains a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Galileo, it remains a
 mystery why, so far as I know, the phenomena are the mere results of
 the power of the Ideal of pure reason, a blind but indispensable
 function of the soul, but the paralogisms (and there can be no doubt
@@ -2619,7 +2610,7 @@ assert, for these reasons, that this is the case) would thereby be
 made to contradict the transcendental unity of apperception.  But the
 proof of this is a task from which we can here be absolved.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, the noumena
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, the noumena
 should only be used as a canon for the Categories.  As is proven in
 the ontological manuals, our sense perceptions, consequently, are by
 their very nature contradictory; therefore, our experience (and it
@@ -2634,7 +2625,7 @@ Antinomies constitute the whole content of our a priori concepts; on
 the other hand, the Ideal of natural reason (and there can be no doubt
 that this is true) is a representation of the manifold.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, certainly, that, irrespective of all
+\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, certainly, that, irrespective of all
 empirical conditions, the Categories are just as necessary as, on the
 other hand, the thing in itself, yet the manifold proves the validity
 of, on the other hand, the employment of the transcendental unity of
@@ -2649,7 +2640,7 @@ exclude the possibility of, however, general logic; consequently, the
 paralogisms of natural reason, when thus treated as our ideas, can be
 treated like philosophy.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, our faculties
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, our faculties
 stand in need to the transcendental objects in space and time;
 certainly, our ideas are a representation of the objects in space and
 time.  The reader should be careful to observe that the Categories
@@ -2664,7 +2655,7 @@ Aristotle tells us that there is a causal connection bewteen the
 noumena and the things in themselves?  The employment of the
 Antinomies is the key to understanding our ideas.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that the
 employment of the transcendental aesthetic, still, exists in our sense
 perceptions; as I have elsewhere shown, the phenomena exist in the
 discipline of practical reason.  Necessity (and Aristotle tells us
@@ -2686,7 +2677,7 @@ account of our sense perceptions, but the thing in itself, so far as I
 know, can not take account of our sense perceptions.  Let us suppose
 that our ideas are a representation of metaphysics.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of human reason, the Ideal of pure reason,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {By virtue of human reason, the Ideal of pure reason,
 in the full sense of these terms, is by its very nature contradictory,
 yet necessity is the key to understanding metaphysics.  The Categories
 have nothing to do with, therefore, the phenomena.  We can deduce that
@@ -2699,7 +2690,7 @@ concerning the existence of the phenomena in general.  The paralogisms
 of human reason are the clue to the discovery of, on the contrary, our
 understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {There can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the
 thing in itself excludes the possibility of the objects in space and
 time, but the discipline of human reason is by its very nature
 contradictory.  It is obvious that, in other words, the manifold, in
@@ -2710,7 +2701,7 @@ yet the thing in itself is just as necessary as the Antinomies.
 Metaphysics exists in our speculative judgements.  By means of
 analysis, the phenomena are a representation of our faculties.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena stand in need to our sense perceptions,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The phenomena stand in need to our sense perceptions,
 but our concepts are the clue to the discovery of formal logic.  The
 objects in space and time have nothing to do with the things in
 themselves, as is evident upon close examination.  Time teaches us
@@ -2726,7 +2717,7 @@ have already seen.  Consequently, it remains a mystery why our a
 priori concepts, on the other hand, are what first give rise to the
 Ideal of human reason, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that, then,
+\__kgl_newpara:n {What we have alone been able to show is that, then,
 the Ideal of human reason, in reference to ends, is the mere result of
 the power of practical reason, a blind but indispensable function of
 the soul, but the Ideal (and the reader should be careful to observe
@@ -2750,7 +2741,7 @@ reason depends on time.  However, our a priori judgements have lying
 before them the employment of necessity, by means of analytic unity.
 }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, it is not
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As will easily be shown in the next section, it is not
 at all certain that the transcendental unity of apperception is the
 key to understanding the things in themselves; certainly, the
 Categories prove the validity of our faculties.  Let us suppose that
@@ -2766,7 +2757,7 @@ posteriori concepts, yet the thing in itself can not take account of,
 as I have elsewhere shown, the Categories.  The question of this
 matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, so regarded, our
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It must not be supposed that, so regarded, our
 experience, in particular, can thereby determine in its totality our
 analytic judgements, yet necessity has nothing to do with, in
 reference to ends, the discipline of human reason.  It is not at all
@@ -2790,7 +2781,7 @@ In my present remarks I am referring to the never-ending regress in
 the series of empirical conditions only in so far as it is founded on
 hypothetical principles.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves prove the validity of, on the
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The things in themselves prove the validity of, on the
 other hand, transcendental logic; therefore, necessity has lying
 before it, indeed, the paralogisms.  What we have alone been able to
 show is that our ideas constitute a body of demonstrated doctrine, and
@@ -2803,7 +2794,7 @@ still, the practical employment of the transcendental objects in space
 and time, that is to say, has lying before it the things in
 themselves.  Natural causes prove the validity of necessity.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The reader should be careful to observe that our a
 priori concepts, in other words, can never, as a whole, furnish a true
 and demonstrated science, because, like general logic, they prove the
 validity of hypothetical principles, by virtue of human reason.  There
@@ -2818,7 +2809,7 @@ of pure reason.  Our ideas constitute the whole content of the objects
 in space and time, but the Ideal, indeed, is the key to understanding
 our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain that
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As we have already seen, it is not at all certain that
 the Ideal of pure reason is just as necessary as natural causes; in
 the case of the Transcendental Deduction, our faculties, in natural
 theology, abstract from all content of knowledge.  The Categories can
@@ -2833,7 +2824,7 @@ whether the paralogisms exist in our experience?  Still, natural
 reason, so far as I know, would be falsified, because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions.  Our faculties would be falsified.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal proves the validity of the objects in space
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The Ideal proves the validity of the objects in space
 and time.  To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain
 that our judgements are a representation of, however, the manifold.
 The objects in space and time exclude the possibility of necessity.
@@ -2842,7 +2833,7 @@ abstracts from all content of knowledge.  There can be no doubt that,
 indeed, the objects in space and time would thereby be made to
 contradict human reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the transcendental unity of
+\__kgl_newpara:n {It is obvious that the transcendental unity of
 apperception can be treated like the Ideal.  I assert that applied
 logic (and it is not at all certain that this is true) stands in need
 of the objects in space and time; certainly, the Ideal of practical
@@ -2862,7 +2853,7 @@ knowledge of our sense perceptions is a priori, we can deduce that our
 experience is what first gives rise to the architectonic of practical
 reason.  This may be clear with an example.  }
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {I assert, consequently, that the Transcendental
+\__kgl_newpara:n {I assert, consequently, that the Transcendental
 Deduction would thereby be made to contradict our faculties, as will
 easily be shown in the next section.  Let us suppose that our ideas,
 in the full sense of these terms, occupy part of the sphere of formal
@@ -2885,7 +2876,7 @@ noumena; on the other hand, the transcendental unity of apperception
 teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of, then, the
 Ideal of pure reason.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the things in
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is evident upon close examination, the things in
 themselves are the clue to the discovery of the phenomena, and
 philosophy (and what we have alone been able to show is that this is
 true) teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of the
@@ -2901,7 +2892,7 @@ pure reason, let us suppose that general logic stands in need of the
 Ideal of human reason, as we have already seen.  The noumena prove the
 validity of, in the study of transcendental logic, our understanding.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Space (and what we have alone been able to show is
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Space (and what we have alone been able to show is
 that this is true) stands in need of necessity, yet our understanding,
 so far as regards the Ideal of practical reason, can never furnish a
 true and demonstrated science, because, like the transcendental unity
@@ -2925,7 +2916,7 @@ representation of, in respect of the intelligible character, time, and
 the pure employment of the discipline of natural reason has lying
 before it our experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Still, it must not be supposed that our faculties are
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Still, it must not be supposed that our faculties are
 a representation of the Ideal of practical reason, as is evident upon
 close examination.  As is proven in the ontological manuals, the
 reader should be careful to observe that the objects in space and time
@@ -2946,7 +2937,7 @@ be careful to observe that, for example, the things in themselves (and
 it is not at all certain that this is the case) are the clue to the
 discovery of our concepts.  But this need not worry us.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {The architectonic of natural reason is the key to
+\__kgl_newpara:n {The architectonic of natural reason is the key to
 understanding, so far as regards our a posteriori knowledge and the
 paralogisms, time; still, the Categories, with the sole exception of
 the never-ending regress in the series of empirical conditions, should
@@ -2964,7 +2955,7 @@ transcendental aesthetic.  Aristotle tells us that our faculties have
 nothing to do with the objects in space and time.  We thus have a pure
 synthesis of apprehension.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the noumena are hypothetical, there can
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Since none of the noumena are hypothetical, there can
 be no doubt that, in particular, our knowledge, in other words, is the
 clue to the discovery of the things in themselves.  Therefore, the
 Ideal is just as necessary as, then, the Ideal, as will easily be
@@ -2978,7 +2969,7 @@ in the manifold.  In the case of time, the Categories, by means of
 transcendental logic, constitute the whole content of the things in
 themselves, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic can thereby determine in its
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Transcendental logic can thereby determine in its
 totality, consequently, our faculties, because of our necessary
 ignorance of the conditions.  Since some of the paralogisms are
 analytic, there can be no doubt that, in reference to ends, the
@@ -2997,7 +2988,7 @@ like time, but our judgements are just as necessary as the Categories.
 Our understanding is a representation of the objects in space and
 time, and the paralogisms are just as necessary as our experience.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {Philosophy (and it must not be supposed that this is
+\__kgl_newpara:n {Philosophy (and it must not be supposed that this is
 true) is a representation of the never-ending regress in the series of
 empirical conditions; however, the Antinomies have nothing to do with,
 in the study of philosophy, the discipline of practical reason.
@@ -3018,7 +3009,7 @@ transcendental unity of apperception, insomuch as the architectonic of
 human reason relies on the Antinomies, can thereby determine in its
 totality natural causes.}
 
-\kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, it remains a
+\__kgl_newpara:n {As is shown in the writings of Hume, it remains a
 mystery why our judgements exclude the possibility of the
 transcendental aesthetic; therefore, the transcendental aesthetic can
 not take account of the thing in itself.  Our knowledge depends on,
@@ -3033,173 +3024,185 @@ manuals, it remains a mystery why space exists in the objects in space
 and time; still, the noumena, in the case of necessity, constitute the
 whole content of philosophy.}
 
-\kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
-\kgl_newword:n {noumena}
-\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental}
-\kgl_newword:n {metaphysics}
-\kgl_newword:n {reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {science}
-\kgl_newword:n {necessity}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
-\kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
-\kgl_newword:n {regress}
-\kgl_newword:n {paralogism}
-\kgl_newword:n {empirical}
-\kgl_newword:n {space}
-\kgl_newword:n {manifold}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {aesthetic}
-\kgl_newword:n {noumena}
-\kgl_newword:n {sphere}
-\kgl_newword:n {time}
-\kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {perception}
-\kgl_newword:n {things in themselves}
-\kgl_newword:n {doctrine}
-\kgl_newword:n {regress}
-\kgl_newword:n {mystery}
-\kgl_newword:n {existence}
-\kgl_newword:n {contradiction}
-\kgl_newword:n {a priori}
-\kgl_newword:n {natural causes}
-\kgl_newword:n {analysis}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {Antinomies}
-\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {formal logic}
-\kgl_newword:n {soul}
-\kgl_newword:n {misapprehension}
-\kgl_newword:n {elsewhere}
-\kgl_newword:n {theology}
-\kgl_newword:n {employment}
-\kgl_newword:n {logic}
-\kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {theoretical sciences}
-\kgl_newword:n {a posteriori}
-\kgl_newword:n {mystery}
-\kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
-\kgl_newword:n {things in themselves}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {contradictory}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {perceptions}
-\kgl_newword:n {Galileo}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {empirical objects}
-\kgl_newword:n {judgements}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {power}
-\kgl_newword:n {hypothetical principles}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental logic}
-\kgl_newword:n {doctrine}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {totality}
-\kgl_newword:n {manifold}
-\kgl_newword:n {inductive judgements}
-\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
-\kgl_newword:n {analytic unity}
-\kgl_newword:n {Hume}
-\kgl_newword:n {canon}
-\kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
-\kgl_newword:n {universal}
-\kgl_newword:n {section}
-\kgl_newword:n {body}
-\kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
-\kgl_newword:n {sense perceptions}
-\kgl_newword:n {natural reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {exception}
-\kgl_newword:n {ampliative judgements}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {analysis}
-\kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {paralogism}
-\kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
-\kgl_newword:n {true}
-\kgl_newword:n {space}
-\kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
-\kgl_newword:n {accordance}
-\kgl_newword:n {regress}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {a priori}
-\kgl_newword:n {disjunctive}
-\kgl_newword:n {soul}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {analytic unity}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
-\kgl_newword:n {cause}
-\kgl_newword:n {manuals}
-\kgl_newword:n {dedicated reader}
-\kgl_newword:n {a posteriori}
-\kgl_newword:n {employment}
-\kgl_newword:n {natural theology}
-\kgl_newword:n {manifold}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental aesthetic}
-\kgl_newword:n {close}
-\kgl_newword:n {full}
-\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
-\kgl_newword:n {clue}
-\kgl_newword:n {me}
-\kgl_newword:n {account}
-\kgl_newword:n {things}
-\kgl_newword:n {sense}
-\kgl_newword:n {intelligible}
-\kgl_newword:n {understanding}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {never}
-\kgl_newword:n {apperception}
-\kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
-\kgl_newword:n {need}
-\kgl_newword:n {space}
-\kgl_newword:n {virtue}
-\kgl_newword:n {Hume}
-\kgl_newword:n {still}
-\kgl_newword:n {whatsoever}
-\kgl_newword:n {even}
-\kgl_newword:n {sphere}
-\kgl_newword:n {position}
-\kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
-\kgl_newword:n {word}
-\kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
-\kgl_newword:n {theology}
-\kgl_newword:n {mystery}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {perception}
-\kgl_newword:n {power}
-\kgl_newword:n {experience}
-\kgl_newword:n {never-ending}
-\kgl_newword:n {analytic}
-\kgl_newword:n {itself}
-\kgl_newword:n {a priori}
-\kgl_newword:n {rule}
-\kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
-\kgl_newword:n {empirical conditions}
-\kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
-\kgl_newword:n {disjunctive}
-\kgl_newword:n {transcendental}
-\kgl_newword:n {science}
-\kgl_newword:n {falsified}
-\kgl_newword:n {reader}
-\kgl_newword:n {blind}
-\kgl_newword:n {employment}
-\kgl_newword:n {discipline}
-\kgl_newword:n {function}
-\kgl_newword:n {careful}
-\kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
-\kgl_newword:n {Categories}
-\kgl_newword:n {part}
-\kgl_newword:n {noumena}
-\kgl_newword:n {doubt}
-\kgl_newword:n {duck}
-\kgl_newword:n {Kant}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
+\__kgl_newword:n {noumena}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
+\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental}
+\__kgl_newword:n {metaphysics}
+\__kgl_newword:n {reason}
+\__kgl_newword:n {science}
+\__kgl_newword:n {necessity}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Categories}
+\__kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
+\__kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
+\__kgl_newword:n {regress}
+\__kgl_newword:n {paralogism}
+\__kgl_newword:n {empirical}
+\__kgl_newword:n {space}
+\__kgl_newword:n {manifold}
+\__kgl_newword:n {understanding}
+\__kgl_newword:n {aesthetic}
+\__kgl_newword:n {noumena}
+\__kgl_newword:n {sphere}
+\__kgl_newword:n {time}
+\__kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
+\__kgl_newword:n {perception}
+\__kgl_newword:n {things in themselves}
+\__kgl_newword:n {doctrine}
+\__kgl_newword:n {regress}
+\__kgl_newword:n {mystery}
+\__kgl_newword:n {existence}
+\__kgl_newword:n {contradiction}
+\__kgl_newword:n {a priori}
+\__kgl_newword:n {natural causes}
+\__kgl_newword:n {analysis}
+\__kgl_newword:n {apperception}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Antinomies}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
+\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
+\__kgl_newword:n {formal logic}
+\__kgl_newword:n {soul}
+\__kgl_newword:n {misapprehension}
+\__kgl_newword:n {elsewhere}
+\__kgl_newword:n {theology}
+\__kgl_newword:n {employment}
+\__kgl_newword:n {logic}
+\__kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
+\__kgl_newword:n {theoretical sciences}
+\__kgl_newword:n {a posteriori}
+\__kgl_newword:n {mystery}
+\__kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
+\__kgl_newword:n {things in themselves}
+\__kgl_newword:n {experience}
+\__kgl_newword:n {contradictory}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Categories}
+\__kgl_newword:n {perceptions}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Galileo}
+\__kgl_newword:n {apperception}
+\__kgl_newword:n {empirical objects}
+\__kgl_newword:n {judgements}
+\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
+\__kgl_newword:n {power}
+\__kgl_newword:n {hypothetical principles}
+\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental logic}
+\__kgl_newword:n {doctrine}
+\__kgl_newword:n {understanding}
+\__kgl_newword:n {totality}
+\__kgl_newword:n {manifold}
+\__kgl_newword:n {inductive judgements}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
+\__kgl_newword:n {analytic unity}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Hume}
+\__kgl_newword:n {canon}
+\__kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
+\__kgl_newword:n {universal}
+\__kgl_newword:n {section}
+\__kgl_newword:n {body}
+\__kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
+\__kgl_newword:n {sense perceptions}
+\__kgl_newword:n {natural reason}
+\__kgl_newword:n {exception}
+\__kgl_newword:n {ampliative judgements}
+\__kgl_newword:n {experience}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Categories}
+\__kgl_newword:n {analysis}
+\__kgl_newword:n {philosophy}
+\__kgl_newword:n {apperception}
+\__kgl_newword:n {paralogism}
+\__kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
+\__kgl_newword:n {true}
+\__kgl_newword:n {space}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
+\__kgl_newword:n {accordance}
+\__kgl_newword:n {regress}
+\__kgl_newword:n {experience}
+\__kgl_newword:n {a priori}
+\__kgl_newword:n {disjunctive}
+\__kgl_newword:n {soul}
+\__kgl_newword:n {understanding}
+\__kgl_newword:n {analytic unity}
+\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
+\__kgl_newword:n {practical reason}
+\__kgl_newword:n {cause}
+\__kgl_newword:n {manuals}
+\__kgl_newword:n {dedicated reader}
+\__kgl_newword:n {a posteriori}
+\__kgl_newword:n {employment}
+\__kgl_newword:n {natural theology}
+\__kgl_newword:n {manifold}
+\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental aesthetic}
+\__kgl_newword:n {close}
+\__kgl_newword:n {full}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
+\__kgl_newword:n {clue}
+\__kgl_newword:n {me}
+\__kgl_newword:n {account}
+\__kgl_newword:n {things}
+\__kgl_newword:n {sense}
+\__kgl_newword:n {intelligible}
+\__kgl_newword:n {understanding}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Categories}
+\__kgl_newword:n {never}
+\__kgl_newword:n {apperception}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Ideal}
+\__kgl_newword:n {need}
+\__kgl_newword:n {space}
+\__kgl_newword:n {virtue}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Hume}
+\__kgl_newword:n {still}
+\__kgl_newword:n {whatsoever}
+\__kgl_newword:n {even}
+\__kgl_newword:n {sphere}
+\__kgl_newword:n {position}
+\__kgl_newword:n {ignorance}
+\__kgl_newword:n {word}
+\__kgl_newword:n {phenomena}
+\__kgl_newword:n {theology}
+\__kgl_newword:n {mystery}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Categories}
+\__kgl_newword:n {perception}
+\__kgl_newword:n {power}
+\__kgl_newword:n {experience}
+\__kgl_newword:n {never-ending}
+\__kgl_newword:n {analytic}
+\__kgl_newword:n {itself}
+\__kgl_newword:n {a priori}
+\__kgl_newword:n {rule}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Transcendental Deduction}
+\__kgl_newword:n {empirical conditions}
+\__kgl_newword:n {knowledge}
+\__kgl_newword:n {disjunctive}
+\__kgl_newword:n {transcendental}
+\__kgl_newword:n {science}
+\__kgl_newword:n {falsified}
+\__kgl_newword:n {reader}
+\__kgl_newword:n {blind}
+\__kgl_newword:n {employment}
+\__kgl_newword:n {discipline}
+\__kgl_newword:n {function}
+\__kgl_newword:n {careful}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Aristotle}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Categories}
+\__kgl_newword:n {part}
+\__kgl_newword:n {noumena}
+\__kgl_newword:n {doubt}
+\__kgl_newword:n {duck}
+\__kgl_newword:n {Kant}
 \group_end:
 \msg_info:nnx {kantlipsum} {how-many}
-  { \int_eval:n {\seq_count:N \g_kgl_pars_seq} }
+  { \int_eval:n {\seq_count:N \g__kgl_pars_seq} }
+%% Copyright (C) 2011-2017 by
+%%   Enrico Gregorio
+%%   enrico DOT gregorio AT univr DOT it
 %% 
+%% It may be distributed and/or modified under the conditions of the
+%% LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), either version 1.3c of this
+%% license or (at your option) any later version.  The latest version
+%% of this license is in the file
+%%     http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt
+%% This work consists of the file  kantlipsum.dtx
+%%           and the derived files kantlipsum.pdf,
+%%                                 kantlipsum.sty and
+%%                                 kantlipsum.ins.
 %%
 %% End of file `kantlipsum.sty'.