[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
| In a message dated 10/4/2002 8:39:45 PM Central Daylight Time, a.rosta@hidden.email writes: << . I wonder if there will be ambiguous cases, when>> Shouldn't be, for, as your example shows, you are talking about (at least) two different things: quantity of a preoprety and truth value of a claim ({ni} and {jei}). But ti does seem that you are not always clear (nor am I about what you say) which it is you are talking about. << > I would take it that xorxes' {ja'acai} etc. are of the class of > comments, with "barely". I am less sure where to put {ja'axipiPA}. > They look like more precise comments, but are translated as > functions, like "very." Since I think that functions should be > represented in the selbri, not off to the side, I will take them too > as comments, though a good translation is not always obvious. The distinction you draw is a valid one that I hadn't thought of before. I'd say that the 'comment' construal of JAhA+CAI better approximates what I had in mind when I proposed it, though the simple notion of there being degrees of truth (analogous to the speed of something that is moving: fast:moving :: very:true) is not incompatible with functionhood. As for JAhA+XI, that was developed (by Official Persons) as a way to do fuzzy logic, so the intention of that is that it be function not comment. >> But moving fast is a different predicate from moving -- or else is a property of moving (a {ni}) so stays in the predicate range-- functions, not comments. The official line is not perfectly clear what it meeans. I take it to be a way of talking about fuzzy values -- comments, then -- not a way of affecting them (nor effecting them neither). |