[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Jorge Llamb�as, On 14/09/2012 03:36:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 8:03 PM, And Rosta<and.rosta@hidden.email> wrote:1. Let s-& r- be extensional, in the sense that in s/ra Ra Pa, Ra and Pa are in the same world.So given Rule (1), how do you talk about making a picture of a unicorn in such a way as to say the unicorn is in the depicted world but not in the world in which the picture is made? And how do you talk about a situation where there is a situation where is a unicorn and I do a picture of the situation? That's not a clear example. Trying again: How do you talk about a situation in which there is an explosion and I photograph it?I wouldn't make that distinction with the grammar. I would say (when the clarification is needed): la je xnra pvsljrna pxra'ika A/ imaginary(A)& unicorn(A): picture(it, A) la je ftca fa spjo'e pxra'ika A/ factual(A)& explosion(A): picture(it, A)
That works for speakers happy to say "saki pvjrni pxrakika'a", and disambiguate with "saki je xnri pvjrni pxrakika'a" and "saki je ftci pvjrni pxrakika'a", i.e. speakers who think the world contains unicorns, some or all of which are imaginary. It doesn't really satisfy the same world/not-necessarily-same world contrast, tho; the difference, with "X see Y", between "There's Y, and Y acts as visual stimulus on X, causing X to form a percept of Y" and "X as a result of visual stimulus perceives Y to obtain". You could force the first interpretation by "la ftca fa smo'e vska'aka" or "la fa smo'e li fi vska'aka lu gnmukaki re mneku ftc/jtne". But it's so much easier just to have two versions of f. --And