[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
| So, then, {ce'u}, {ke'a} an {Qkau}. Are there other strange critters like this? 1. The restrictions on these things is not strictly grammatical -- though they should be. That is, {ke'a broda}, {ce'u broda}, and {ko'a kau broda} and {ko'a broda kau} all parse as sentences, without {poi} or some other subordinator -- and each is grammatical with the others' subordinators. {ke'a} and {ce'u} are just KOhA and {kau} is unrestricted UI. 2. The line about {ce'u} being a lambda variable doesn't hold up well under inspection. Aside from the fact that it can be repeated, {ce'u} alone doen't make the right sort of thing and even adding an abstractor doesn't created a genuine lambda object (which would take arguments to replace {ce'u} in most cases : {ko'a \ [ce'u broda ce'u] ko'e} "k1 bears the relation broda-2 to k2" -- though this does work with {du'u}, for example, in place of "\" and {vau} or {kei} for "]." I suppose the other abstractors would work as well. (Remind me in the loCCan list to make {ce'u} a genuine lambda, so broda-2 is {ce'u da ce'u de zo'u da broda de}.) Indeed, if {du'u} didn't have the meaning it has, the structure would work fine. 3. Partee... to sorta the contrary notwithstanding, {ke'a} is not really a variable, but a slightly odd anaphoric pronoun. Odd because it is part (at least with {poi} and {po'u}) of the phrase it repeats. I suppose that this comes down to a transcendental particular quantifier at some level, but deep. 4. The {Qkau} (and plain Q, for that matter) are also not variables at any sensible level, but raise up a model to be met in some often unspecified ways by all the propositions that embody answers. Taking them as variables raises some messy questions about binding, since the transcendentals are outside the scope of {du'u}. 5. {ce'u} in abstractions seem to create functions from things to the corresponding abstractio of [bridi] with the name of the things in for {ce'u}. these all make sense, but what sense some of them make is a little hard to see -- except for {du'u} and maybe {ka}. |