[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-")


On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:50 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote: 

These communications get rather out of synch.  So, to sum up;  'lV' is a particular quantifier (an sV but for one peculiar property) which, wherever it occurs, has scope over the entire discourse and thus is immune to influence from local matters like rV or other sV or na or je.  This does mean that somethings which I would have called lVs on analogy with {lo} are, in fact, sVs, since they have only local scope and are affected by negations and other local quantifiers.  In particular, the definition of o'e turns out to require an initial sV, not lV.. 

Okay, am I to understand correctly that you've simply invented a novel quantifier and plopped it into FOL?  Or, is it possible to define your "lo/lV" more precisely in terms of pure FOL?  Can you for example prove that:

na la Ra Pa <=> la Ra na Pa

... i.e. can you demonstrate that in your system each side is a logically equivalent transformation of the other?  Or do you simply declare that that identity is so?  What about the other known identities I have mentioned?  I want to give your ideas due consideration, but I need to see things a little better defined than this.