[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:17 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote: > From: Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@hidden.email> > > I wouldn't put it that way. "k" is as always merely a variable > separator. The binder would be "f", and it binds all the variables > that appear in its desinence except for the first one. > A yes, the old problem of connectives looking like quantifiers looking like variables, looking like whatever -- not a very perspicuous language so far. Connectives all start with j-, quantifiers are r- and s- and variables are all vowels, so I don't see why you say they all look alike. > And f isn't a binder either, just a predicate maker. So far it wasn't, but Mike's proposal is that it be a binder, binding all variables in its desinence except for the first one. > We have not so far seen any need to distinguish propositions from > states of affairs, or rather, we've had no need to refer to > propositions, so you can think of it as the holed version of a state > of affairs. > Well, someday you will have to deal with beliefs and the like and so will have to deal somehow with propositions. Instead of "krcake" meaning "a believes that proposition e is true", we can have it mean "a believes that state of affairs e holds", so we don't really need to refer to propositions in order to deal with beliefs. > "It" being? multivalent properties or multivalent propositional functions or what? I think "it" was supposed to be "la fakeki prmeki". co ma'a xrxe