[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [engelang] Xorban: Semantics of "l-" (and "s-" and "r-")

So, you can't just throw in an lV anywhere you want and succeed in saying what you want.  The same goes for rV and sV, of course, but seems to be more critical for lV.  But that is possibly an artifact of my still thinking in terms of {lo}, a different sort of operator.  Incidentally, if I understand what is going on aright, my problems with lV will have repercussions for the constants like "I" and "you" and "whatever": if lV is totally leftmost, then the first two are all right and the last all wrong; contrariwise contrariwise -- well, not really all wrong but "I" and "you" get redefined each time they appear.


From: Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@hidden.email>
To: engelang@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 8, 2012 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: [engelang] Xorban: Semantics of "l-" (and "s-" and "r-")

 
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 5:59 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote:
>
> The point is that you
> can't just say that all of these are covered by lV without also considering
> what all else is going on -- where that lV is going to turn up in the
> logical form of the sentence.

The idea is for the Xorban sentence to be the logical form of the
sentence, a loglang is supposed to be speakable logic.

ma'a xrxe