[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
> I don't disagree with anything you've said (except that it needs
> to be clarified, IMO, that .9 entails "not (wholly) true").
It all depends on how you define NOT for continuous truth values.
A value of .9 is not a value of 1 just as it is not a value of .8.
But we probably want a softer "NOT" for continuous truth values.
For example, a function that maps value x to value 1-x.
Then {.9 <bridi>} does not entail {not 1 <bridi>} = {0 <bridi>}.
> A further point: you are suggesting that {ko'a clani} is a
> proposition that is never wholly true. That may be right, but
> I would also like to introduce a further example that sometimes
> needs fuzzy values and sometimes doesn't.
>
> 1. He is in the room.
>
> If he is half in the room and half out, then he is sort of in
> the room -- the truth value of "he is in the room" is between
> pi no and pi ro. If he is entirely in the room, but only by a
> few inches, then the truth value is pi ro, but nonetheless he
> is barely in the room, and he is 'less in the room' than
> someone standing further from the doorway.
Yes, I agree. I would say almost any proposition is susceptible
of both treatments. {ko'a clani} can also be seen as a yes/no
proposition in some contexts. I'm saying that whichever kind
of modifier we use determines how we're treating the proposition
for the purposes of truth evaluation.
mu'o mi'e xorxes