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

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

Re: [engelang] xorban summary

I don't understand by what logic the first pair are false and the second true. My initial thinking is that they're all false (and o'e should be sa sma) but would all be true with a different  kind of negation (replacing na mlta by li mlti na hcaki).

On Sep 18, 2012 6:29 AM, "Mike S." <maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:


On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:56 PM, And Rosta <and.rosta@hidden.email> wrote: 

Regarding the second consideration, although o'e in different predicates aren't cobound, they must be coreferential because they are the singularization of everything.

Pragmatically, the interpretation might redifferentiate them, but pragmatics is outside the score of the design.

We have the following putative contradictions.

*le sme je mlte na mlte.
*co qbushqa'i le sme je =a'ike na =a'ike

which seem to be false as expected. But then these seem to be true:

je le sme mlte le sme na mlte.
co qbushqa'i je le sme =a'ike le sme na =a'ike

Those seems rather hard to square with the "je nu {cobound} {coreferential}" hypothesis. Surely, for each singularizing binding, there is a separate and very distinct desingularizing application under that binding.