Original sentence: Another argument, possibly only found outside academic discussion, is: that it is possible to pass the Turing Test using purely syntactical rules (without semantics) is wrong, since the Turing test is essentially a test for semantics.That is, if Searle-in-the-room passes the Turing Test, then ipso facto Searle-in-the-room understands Chinese; and therefore his second assumption is incorrect.This argument has the logical structure "it is because it is because it is"
Edited sentence: Searle's assumption that it is possible to pass the Turing test using purely syntactical rules (without semantics) is wrong, since the Turing test is essentially a test for semantics.Thus the conclusions that Searle makes are based on a false premise