[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
| In a message dated 10/24/2002 2:46:11 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hidden.email writes: << Consider this interview: >> I don't see this interview taking place with someone who has never written a novel, so that problem is by the way. For the rest I think the "in my nature" is telling: "I always knew I was /would be a novelist" seem a perfectly clear piece of self-concept -- the role model: this is the role I play. Different -- and more serious, perhaps -- than soi disant, but along the same lines. And, as here, often clearer in retrospect than at the time. There is a range of cases here, with this perhaps nearest to the actual producer of a product. But there was for this person probably a time when s/he was already self-identified as a novleist but there was as yet no novel written, perhaps even written at, so still a novle-writer, but not yet a writer of novels. Something similar happens with cooks. A cook who has not cooked today is still a cook today and every day -- until he stops being a cook, however that comes about. But someone who cooks today may very well not be a cook at all, for all that there is something s/he cooked. It's a role thing among otherthings -- perhaps s/he is given the role of cook for today, that is, assigned to get meals on the table. But that doesn't make the preson a cook simpliciter, only a cook-for-today. It seems to me a good idea to get some simple cases nailed down and build out from there as far as possible along one track to find it limits, then backtrack to see what other paths are available to meet the problems of plan A, perhaps supplanting it entirely, perhaps supplementing it. Starting out with dispositional properties like being a cook -- rather than occurrent ones like being cooking -- introduces irrelevant (to the central issue of this investigation anyhow) problems that may overshadow the one being investigated. That being said. I {lo'o'o} taken? If not, I'd like to take it for "a whatsis/ whatsises" notion I mentioned earlier and then suggest at least trying many of these cases with it. Some will, I think, be solved, the failure of others may highlight what are the central point so that particular case. So, for example, the "I need a (perhaps specified "the right sort of) box to hold this. Get me one" seems to work fairly well here (expanding a bit upon "need") "If there is any box here right soon, I will use it [the first that comes to hand] to hold this. See to it that there is one" Both of these "box"s seem to me to be adequately dealt with by {lo'o'o tanxe}. I foresee some tinering to get quantifiers and imperatives lined up right, but that aside, the conditions seem to be about right. Comments about what is missing -- and, especially, the minimum sorts of fixes needed -- are invited. |