[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 2:17 PM, And Rosta <and.rosta@hidden.email> wrote: > Jorge Llambías, On 07/09/2012 03:21: > > > I think you need: li Ri Pi<=> je jo si Ri Pi ri Ri Pi jo si Pi Ri ri Pi > > Ri > > > > i.e. there's only one thing that Ri, and it's the only thing that Pi. > > How come it's the only thing that Pi? I was considering what would be needed for "li Ri Pi" and "li Pi Ri" to be equivalent. But I don't think they are quite equivalent, although they can usually describe the same situation, but by means of different universes of discourse. > >> I don't think "la bcda fgha" implies "sa bcda fgha" much less "ra bcda > >> fgha", though either of the latter does imply "la bcda fgha". > > > > Not in the same context. You can only move from "sa bcda fgha" or "ra > > bcda fgha" to "la bcda fgha" by changing the universe of discourse to > > one where bcda (and to some extent fgha as well) is no longer > > dividuated, which is typically not the case in universes where it > > makes sense to use s- or r-. So it's not a logical implication that > > can take us from s-/r- to l- unless we are already in l-'s territory, > > in which case you wouldn't be using s-/r- in the first place. > > But Mike was saying you can't go from lV to rV/sV, and I think that lV > does entail both sV and rV. "la ma xrxe rgntna, ra ma xrxe rgntna, sa ma > xrxe rgntna" (is Argentinian) are each true of the same construal of the > same world. I agree. But the mere presence of r-/s- practically assures the destruction of that world and the creation of a new one. Language abhors singleton domains of quantification. "ra ma xrxe rgntna" or "sa ma xrxe rgntna" take me to a domain where some stages of me may not be Argentinian, a domain that "la ma xrxe rgntna" doesn't really conjure up. ma'a xrxe