On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:29 PM, John E Clifford
<kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote:
Knowledge and belief have the same abstractors because they are the same things, propositions (or whatever you will, so long as it works out right).
I agree: "du'u" marks a proposition. The argument place of djn-x2 downsteps that proposition to a "situation" in the same world as the knower, and krc-x2 ranges over worlds that contain the situation believed in by the believer.
It would nice to be able to agree on some terminology for the following correspondences, but I would consider any suggestion in order to reach consensus:
grammatical entity / extension / intension
--------------------------------------------
formula with no free variables / situation / proposition
formula with 1 free variable / set of entities / property
formula with 2 free variables / set of ordered pairs / binary relation
formula with 3 free variables / set of ordered triplets / ternary relation
etc.
All we did today was discuss how to "package up" (CLL's words, section 11.4) a formula with N free variables using fV + (N) kV.
There's nothing unusual about this terminology, except that "situation" is somewhat novel (and I am not sure how it meshes with the work of Davidson, who popularized the term). Usually, both a formula with no free variables and/or its corresponding extension would be called a "sentence", but in Xorban we have given that term a particular meaning involving illocutionary force, so I suggest "situation" to fill the gap.
No slip through; you just ignored what is going one. And perhaps saying it all out would make the point clearer. The claim "I know that p" entails p (not "that p", which isn't a statement), but "I believe that p" does not.
Yes. Rather like "I found a unicorn" entails that some unicorn exists, while "I sought a unicorn" does not.
We could derive a long word glossed as "having a relatively-high temperature" even while providing "glr", glossed as "hot" as a shortcut. These would be synonyms, but the long form would serve to make the meaning of the short form transparent.
We can do abbreviations, but it would be a good idea to get the basics straight before going for economy. Otherwise you may economize yourself into contradictions or at least not quite getting what you want. Have you though about how to deal with scalar properties?
I increasingly consider that part of lexical design. Frankly I think we should be checking out Morneau's monograph. No sense in reinventing the wheel.