[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Mike S., On 31/08/2012 02:48:
No.
> Did you and And decide on a way to say "but"?
My sense is that it should be an illocutionary, and that there should be a way to make illocutionaries out of predicates, because an open class of illocutionaries is needed.
Well, I say illocutionary, but strictly speaking "but" is not performing an action (as illocutionaries do); rather it is expressing contrast, but outside the scope of any illocutionary. E.g. "He is poor but happy" means "I-state he is poor and happy; poverty and happiness contrast".
Probably we need something like this:
XX = unary discourse markers, outside scope of illocutionary:
XX includes a contrast-marking particle
"he is poor but happy"
"contrast and poor happy"
C-V = binary discourse marker, where V binds variable in first formula and first formula ascribes property (e.g. of being mindblowing) to second formula.I think "nu" does not mean "maybe".
> I haven't been following all the CV'V stuff. Now that "nu" has been created, I was wondering how that would work with 'but':
>
> je klma'a nu klme'e
> I am going and you are or are not going.
> =I'm going and maybe you too.
>
> j[but] klma'a nu klme'e
> =I'm going but you may be not going.
> =I'm going but maybe you not.
>
> je nu klme'e klma'a
> You are or are not going and I am going.
> You may be going, and I am going. -- not sure if this sounds right.
>
> j[but] nu klme'e klma'a
> You may be not going, but I am.
>
> Any ideas on that? Has that been covered?
I need reminding what the point of the truth and tautology operators is....