[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-")



John E. Clifford, On 11/09/2012 15:30:
And I want chopped liver? Where do our goals differ, exactly? We
both want a language capable of being used for the full range of
communications but which has clear unequivocal grammatical rules.
Further, I assume you too want these rules to reflect the best
Logical relations, for clarity and precision. When I say I want to
know what makes a sentence true, I mean that in the general way: Fa
is true if the referent of a is in the class assigned to F. This
works whatever that class may be and what sorts of objects there are
and which is labeled a. What less than this do you want or more do
you think I want?

If logical relations are the syntactic predicate--argument and operator--variable relations, I want them. If logical relations are ones that hold between logical forms and worlds -- i.e. pertain to truth conditions, then I don't want them.

You've been wanting answers from me about truth-conditions, wanting to know what the world looks like if such and such a sentence is true. The formally designed & codified part of the language I want to build doesn't answer those questions.

This difference between my goals and some of my collaborators' doesn't prevent collaboration where our goals align. But I do hope that recognition of the difference  will soon quell discussion generated by differences between our goals.

--And.