[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
| In a message dated 10/4/2002 9:26:16 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hidden.email writes: << >As I said, I would rather that functions be predicates, as irt makes for >> Whoa (I like this figure, obviously)! The example is not a function but a comment. The function is {mutce bajra} (probably {mutce le ka bajra}) which has a systematically modified version of the truth curve for {bajra} but is a new predicate. "Much in truth" seems to be the comment "The horse is running (this is very true)" [would {sei} do to set this aside, if you wanted a sentence rather than just a tag like {ja'acai}?] As for {va'e}, it probably has roles to play in both {jei} and {ni}, and, in the former case, also in those complex comments. << I'm not sure I see the difference between connective and function. (I understand that it can be called connective as an extension of true connectives that connect two things, but it can be confusing.) Can't a function have fixed rules? >> Probably every function has a general rule: "very" lengthens the 0 portion, shortens the 1 portion and gives the whole curve a shallower slope, for example. But the details vary with the particular predicate being modified (even beyond the obvious that the axes involved in the slope differ). Connectives, on the other hand have a single definte rule across the whole of a system. However {na} is defined -- V {na x} = 1-V{x}, for example -- it is the same regardless of what x is. |
--- Begin Message ---
- From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hidden.email>
- Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 02:24:13 +0000
- Subject: Re: [jboske] more true (was: RE: Re: ka ka (was: Context Leapers)
- To: jboske@yahoogroups.com
la pycyn cusku di'e >As I said, I would rather that functions be predicates, as irt makes for >less >confusion >and shows the role better: evaluating a new, but related, predicate rather >than a comment on how the old predicate is evaluated. We have some of those as gismu (mutce, milxe, dukse...), but I'm not sure whether they can take the predicate as an argument. Can we say for example: le du'u le xirma cu bajra cu mutce le ka ce'u jetnu That the horse is running is much in truth. (Or perhaps in some other property?) Also there is {va'e}, which we were in the wiki trying to figure out how it works. >{na} is a connective, so none of the categories outlined. It has fixed >rules >within any evaluation system (and those rules have to fall within a fairly >limited range: inversion, True-n, rotation left or right. I can't think of >any other plausible {na} at the moment.) I'm not sure I see the difference between connective and function. (I understand that it can be called connective as an extension of true connectives that connect two things, but it can be confusing.) Can't a function have fixed rules? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: jboske-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--- End Message ---