On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 1:45 PM, John E. Clifford
<kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote:
On Oct 3, 2012, at 10:43 PM, "Mike S." <
maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:
A couple tweaks: explicit sentences are allowed after "he", but not after "hi", since there might be another aftertree following.
la ma djna he lu ( ra grka he fu ju glka xkra ra mlta hi ) ju stda jnvaku la ma lce hi.
"John, that all dogs are happly black, as are all cats, firmly believes, as does Alice."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Still trying to sort thing out a bit.
1. I guess that djn and lce are simply predicates not explicitly names (but then shouldn't the latter be lca to fit the pattern? Typos get really confusing sometimes).
la ma djna = la qdjanqa
la ma lce = la qalisqa
No worries. I am simply finished with using "m-" if it generates this much confusion.
2. hi is an anaphoric prosentence, like Lb go'i, with the replacement indicated each time.
Yes, each replacement is indicated by "he" or "hi". They are the "placeholders" for a core formula (not sentence) that follows the foretree and/or precedes the aftertree. Maybe parsing the main clause i.e. the whole sentence like this will help:
( la ma djna he ) ( lu ra grka he fu ju glka xkra ra mlta hi ju stda jnvaku ) ( la ma lce hi )
= {foretree} {core-formula} {aftertree}
... that is to say:
( la ma djna he ) is an foretree.
( lu ra grka he fu ju glka xkra ra mlta hi ju stda jnvaku ), = CF1, is a core formula.
( la ma lce hi ) is an aftertree.
The "{foretree} {core-formula} {aftertree}" thing is an arborized formula corresponding to a specific unarborized "original" formula. "Dearborizing" the arborized formula involves replacing both "he" and "hi" with the core formula, and coordinating the resulting branches with "je":
( la ma djna he ) CF1 ( la ma lce hi )
=> _je_ ( la ma lce _CF1_ ) ( la ma djna _CF1_ )
... where CF1 is the relatively large core formula that was in the middle. Inside CF1 we have a subordinate clause comprising the restriction of "lu" that is another arborized formula:
( ra grka he ) ( fu ju glka xkra ) ( ra mlta hi )
= {foretree} {core-formula} {aftertree}
... which is an arborization of:
je ra mlta fu ju glka xkra ra grka fu ju glka xkra
3. ? he is a cataphoric prosentence - or proformula, anyhow -- No, that's not working. Why is ra grka outside the proposition (is f a generic abstractor, capable of taking any of the at least three types?) but ra mlta inside? But at least he says the two hi'd sentences are AND joined? I don't see why he rather than je here. And I don't see these as involving term sets at all. They seem rather to use the also useful -- but less abreviatory -- pro devices.
You can say that both "he" and "hi" are proformulas (not prosentence though). Think of the "hi"-tree as a "he"-tree which has been relocated after the core formula, keeping in mind that the core-formula and the aftertree together constitute merely a rewriting/arborization of an original formula that does not change on the logical level.
They aren't really termsets; they are term trees, and "term" can refer generically to any unary operator or binary operator with its first complement.
I obviously need to work through some more examples before I can talk about this system.
Let me know if this email helps.