[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
Is there anything better for it to be than a KOhA? KOhA is rather inelegant.
The only alternative seems to be a new selmaho of its own.
Basically I want to say that in an ideal world, if X is within the scope of Y, then X is in a lower bridi than Y.
This is not how it usually goes in Lojban though, because everything in the prenex is typically in the same bridi.
I'm not sure if I'm being clear. Here's an example (Polish): Ex not Ay and Fxy Gxy can be rewritten with the hierarchical structure made explicit thus: [ Ex [ not [ Ay [ and [F [x] [y]] [G [x] [y]] ]]]] If there was a way to encode this structure other than using linear order, then the order could change without altering the formula, e.g. [ [ not [ [ [F [x] [y]] [G [x] [y]] and ] Ay ]] Ex] The closer the eventual solution is to this ideal, the fewer logical problems could ensue.
I think what you're saying is that you don't want infixed structures, right? The problem with allowing the quantifier at either end is that then you need to mark the end of the scope as well. Otherwise, if you allow some to be at the beginning and some at the end you can't determine their relative scopes. I think the two workable options are: (1) the prenex is continued after zo'au. Anything put after zo'au works as if it were put in the prenex, in the same order, and after whatever is overtly there already. (2) Anything after zo'au has scope over everything preceding, including the prenex. I can see advantages for both. But any alternating system allowing more flexibility than that would require lots of cumbersome brackets. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________Unlimited Internet access -- and 2 months free!� Try MSN. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp