Roleset reintroduce.01 Verbnet Class: NONE "cause to meet":

Roles:

Arg0:entity making reintroduction


Arg1:entity being reintroduced


Arg2:entity being reintroduced TO

Examples:

without arg2 (-)
Mr. Stoltzman reintroduced his colleagues.
Arg0:	Mr. Stoltzman
REL:	reintroduced
Arg1:	his colleagues




with arg2 (-)
John reintroduced Mary to the pleasures of chocolate ice cream.
Arg0:	John
REL:	reintroduced
Arg1:	Mary
Arg2-to:	the pleasures of chocolate ice cream

To my mind, "reintroduce" takes two almost-symmetrical arguments; that is, if arg1 is reintroduced to arg2, logically arg2 is reintroduced to arg1 as well. Further, there are complicated figure-ground and intentionality relations to worry about also. To AVOID all of that, take a purely *syntactic* approach to the arg1/arg2 distinction: arg2 is reintroduced by "to".

Roleset reintroduce.02 Verbnet Class: NONE "implement, begin, bring up":

Roles:

Arg0:implementer, agent


Arg1:thing being brought up


Arg2:medium, where arg1 is brought up into

Examples:

advertising (-)
Newsweek will reintroduce a new incentive plan for advertisers.
Arg0:	Newsweek
Argm-MOD:	will
REL:	reintroduce
Arg1:	a new incentive plan for advertisers




with medium (-)
The man with the clipboard reintroduced a bit of les sportif into our itinerary.
Arg0:	The man with the clipboard
REL:	reintroduced
Arg1:	a bit of les sportif
Arg2-into:	our itinerary.

In WSJ this sense seems to be more common. Especially when the "medium" argument is present, the two senses are very close in meaning, at least to my mind.