[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Xod:
> And Rosta's idea of truth values extending above and below 0 and 1 is just
> as good as restricting truth values to [0, 1] but including "enough-ness"
> thresholds "near" 0 and 1.
>
> This means mapping a qualitative set upon the quantity scale, which is all
> "qualitative" really is: words and phrases standing for numbers or number
> ranges. To establish and vigorously defend a different cmavo for a
> distinction on the order of Roman numerals vs. Arabics seems ludicrous,
> particularly in the absence of a rigorous way to specify the
> quality:quantity map being used. (Hint: yes, I am referring to ni and ka.)
>
> In the context of fuzzy logic, tall=1 either means he is the tallest
> imaginable, or that nobody can dispute that he's tall. This really
> correlates to an infinite height. However, Kareem may certainly be beyond
> the "tall enough" limit. Big deal.
Exactly. We must make sure that these two conceptual schemata are kept
distinct.
> What is the distinction between "truth values" and "comments"?
>
> I have a little problem with ja'a + CAI. It emulates the UI, where a ui
> covers .5 the truth scale and uinai covers the other. But it's the same
> ui; here with ja'a and na it's a different cmavo and no "-nai". To improve
> the emulation we should use "nanai" or "ja'anai" -- or better yet, just
> stick with the digits God gave us.
>
> Another issue with ja'a + CAI is that CAI can already float wherever it
> likes in a bridi, and could modify the ".i" as well, so including ja'a in
> there is totally redundant.
What's a good convenient but unvague way to say "very X", then,
in contrast to "pretty X-ish"?
> And Rosta wrote:
>
> <<
> Fair enough. I wonder if there will be ambiguous cases, when
> pi PA values are ambiguous between (a) how much p is happening,
> and (b) the extent to which p satisfies the threshold criteria
> for being true at all. For example, {ko'a ja'a xi pi bi melbi}
> might mean that ko'a's beauty measures .8 in millihelens, or
> it might mean that ko'a is not quite beautiful but is close to
> the threshold of beauty. I'd prefer to stick with the latter
> reading only.
> >>
>
> I hope you don't mean that ja'axipibi melbi is less than melbi!
That is what I meant.
> I should think it means the le melbi is .8 on [0, 1] of melbi.
Obviously I disagree, but if there is some better way to indicate
'sort-of', then I don't care that much.
Maybe the best way for me to proceed would be to outline a
scheme using experimental cmavo, & then we can see if we can
find ways to do it with existing resources with comparable ease.
--And.