On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:16 PM, John E. Clifford <kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote:
>
> Well, that does clarify things a bit: dz is a predicate that extends the scope of a previous binder into the next sentence. Note that it is strictly unnecessary for l (and practically unnecessary in any case).
I'm not sure how "dz-" extends the scope of a previous binder. It
seems to me that we have separate bindimngs for each sentence:
na sa xjra le strde ctkake. [la dza] li rlci dksaki.
No pig oysters eats. [Pigs] are delicate in excess.
If we extended the scope of s- into the next sentence we would get the
wrong meaning:
na sa xjra je le strde ctkake li rlci dksaki.
No pig (oysters eats & is delicate in excess).
Extend the binder's scope. If you want to do it mechanically, it would be ra xjra je na le strede ctkake li rlci dksaki. But I suppose it is meant to be transcendental.
> Li rlci dkseki is sorta ridiculous; it assumes an ordered class with our group off at one end.
"Excessive" is just beyond a certain boundary, it doesn't have to be at the end.
Oops, should have said, "towards" ; the ordered class is still necesssary and still odd.
> It would be more natural, it seems to me, to make the modification in the property rather than the class.
Natlangs don't seem to favor mentioning a property for this:
"This is too bright" rather than "this has too much brightness".
"This is too much of a burden" rather than "this has too much ?burdenness".
Bringing up a property seems unnecessary.
Yes, natural languages favor modifying the predicate -- with "too" in English -- rather than referring to the class. Since Xorban is now set up not to allow modifying a predicate, the nearest related thing is taking a modification of a property. "This is extreme of the brights" or "this is extreme of the burdensomes" are even stranger (well, that is debatable; they are both pretty odd).
> If you are worried, as you seem to be, about using up letters, you would be better finding a way to talk about properties -- in both senses -- than this bit of frill.
What are the two senses of properties?
Modal and Fregean: function from worlds to extensions and Sinn (not well defined, but necessary for intentions in the cognitive cases at least-- if not the representative and perhaps to explain the modal).
co ma'a xrxe