[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
pc:
> a.rosta@hidden.email writes:
> <<
>
> UNARY OPERATORS
>
> - : false
> 0 : sorta
> + : true
>
> - 0 +
> =====
> - 0 + ja'a
> + 0 - na
> - + - ja'a cu'i = na cu'i
> + + - na'e ja'a ku
> - + + na'e na ku
> + - + na('e?) ja'a cu'i = na('e?) na cu'i
>
> >>
> OK (see xorxes working over of the purported Aymara system some time
> back, summarized on the wiki at Aymara, I think.)
I have seen it. I understand what's going on, but I can't get my
head round any of the operators beyond the 7 I listed, but these
7 seem pretty useful.
> <<
> DEGREES
>
> ja'a cai : very
> ja'a sai : fairly
> ja'a ru'e : barely
> na ru'e : almost
> na sai : fairly un-
> na cai : not at all
> >>
> What are these? Unary operators again?
I think so, but I am content for you to tell me otherwise.
> They might be, with some
> truth tables or othere, but plausible readings don't last very long
> here: {ja'a cai} might be - -+ and {na sai} might equate with {na'e
> na ku} -- or that might be {ja'a ru'e}. But there are going to be
> cases which just don't fit.
Ah, no. These are not operators that switch around values in
trivalent (or even bivalent logic). They are degree words.
{ja'a cai broda} = {lo'e du'u broda cu mutce lo'e du'u ce'u [jetnu? --
replace by your preferred selbri]}
> So, these are either measures of something else -- the factors that
> make for truth -- or else they are modifiers -- different truth
> assignments on the basis of the same factors. Which? I go for
> measures of factors, but only because I like to see modifiers
> represented in the predicate.
You'd better clarify for me the difference, before I risk an
answer.
>
> <<
> TYPES OF NEGATION OF DEGREE
>
> na('e?) <ja'a sai> : in degree that is other than <very>
> ?? : in degree that is less than
> ?? : in degree that is more than
> >>
> I am even less sure what these are supposed to be, but presumably
> they belong to the same class as the immediately preceding.
"other-than-fairly beautiful" would cover any degree of
beauty but "fairly", e.g. "very", "almost", "not at all",
"sorta".
"less-then-fairly beautiful" would cover any degree of beauty
in NEG direction, from "slightly/barely beautiful" to "not at
all beautiful". More-than would be the opposite.
> <<
> DEGREES OF JA'A CU'I
> ?? : sorta-but-closer-to-being-POS-than-NEG
> ?? : sorta-but-much-closer-to-being-POS-than-NEG
> ?? : sorta-but-somewhat-closer-to-being-POS-than-NEG
> ?? : sorta-but-slightly-closer-to-being-POS-than-NEG
> ?? : sorta-but-closer-to-being-NEG-than-POS
> ?? : sorta-but-much-closer-to-being-NEG-than-POS
> ?? : sorta-but-somewhat-closer-to-being-NEG-than-POS
> ?? : sorta-but-slightly-closer-to-being-NEG-than-POS
> >>
> And on this I am at a loss. I see the general idea here, I think,
> but don't see how to deal with it without going beyond the three
> values or making mixed messages: "ja'a cui [bridi] and the factors
> that make for truth sum up to being slightly/somewhat/ much/- closer
> to this side than that." Do we also want to do degrees in ja'a cai
> and na cai and .... And the mind boggles at what the truth values of
> all these things are going to be when sorted out.
> I think it is time to work through a whole case here, with all the
> ducks out in the open.
I'm not interested in being to compute the result of recursively
applying one of these 'operators' to another.
But when x is borderline broda, I would like to be able to say
whereabouts on the borderline, relative to the territory on
either side of the border.
Has the train crossed the border? If none of it has, then the
answer is clearly No. If all of has, then the answer is clearly
Yes. If some but not all of has, then the answer (for some
purposes) is Sorta. If only the very front of the train has
crossed the border then it is "sorta-but-much-closer-to-being-in-X-
than-to-being-in-Y".
> So, what happens with a man, Joe, and a 13' x 16' room with the only
> door in the middle of a 16' wall? What are the readings in various
> areas for "Joe is in(side) the room." I'm assuming that the factors
> that make for truth here are distances from the center of the door
> sill on the inside (the origin), that the door frame is 4" deep, and
> that, for the moment, angle from the origin is not significant.
If he is fully inside the room, then his distance from the entrance
gives you the "slightly/barely"--"very" scale = ja'aru'e--ja'acai.
If he is part in and part out, then he is on the Sorta = ja'a cu'i
scale, and his position on the scale is determined by how much is
inside and how much outside ("sorta-but-somewhat-closer-to-being-
inside-than-outside", etc.).
> (For xorxes, maybe, I should point out that, according to Parkinson
> -- and, in another way, Potter -- claim that there is a perfect spot
> to be in a room.) Let's stick to the three-value system as long as
> possible though.
I am sticking to the three-value system for truth operators, but I'm
also looking at degree operators.
--And.