[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
At 09:59 AM 12/7/02 -0600, Jordan DeLong wrote:
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 11:05:23AM -0000, And Rosta wrote: > > Does this not also implicate, though, that lo'e must be "global > > squinting" in order for le'e to have any use? (because le'e > > essentially is the "local squinting")=20 > >=20 > > (this supports that lo'e merkypre cu nelci zoizo. baseball .zo. is > > false, but le'e of the same is true, as would be expected under the > > very high-level definitions of the gadri given in the book)=20 >=20 > I'm not sure if our messages are crossing or mine are getting > delayed again, but I've already posted a message pointing out > that one can squint locally at lo'i broda, which is not the > same as squinting locally at le'i broda. In the same message I > pointed out that the distinction between objective and subjective > perspectives generalizes beyond the case of lo'e. I'm not sure which order I got it. I think the following is the message you mean? Anyway here's a response. > Even on the subjective/local squinting view, if I am fixated > on one American girl in particular, and subjectively end up seeing > something heavily coloured by her when I squint away all intermerko > differences, then there is no basis for arguing that I am talking > about le'e merko, since the input to my squinting is lo'i merko, > not le'i merko. I think there is a basis: (i) you have a particular group of things (in this case containing only 1 element) in mind when you start the squinting, which suggests an e-gadri. (ii) your squinting is based on actual existing creatures (in this case only one), instead of just the general concept "merkypre". (iii) you should be able to make these generalizations about these creatures without needing to commit yourself to claiming they are members of lo'i merkypre, and le'e satisfies this (lo'e me le). The input to your squinting is not neccesarily lo'i merkypre as you claim. it is one thing which you happen to think is a member of lo'i merkypre (i.e. it's le'i merkypre). (iv) Furthermore, taking only 1 member of lo'i merkypre as input is not sufficent to make a generalization (this one isn't actually circular, even though it sounds that way---I mean the word 'generalization' itself, not as in lo'e). (v) deciding that lo'e is global, and le'e is global of a particular group of entities (lo'e me le---i.e. local) allows us to easily specify which in normal discourse. Your ad-hoc method leaves it completely unspecified, and allows people to use global or local with either, effectively nulling the diference between the two, in addition to abandoning the normal e-gadri and o-gadri distinction. I'm sure there's other arguments... > I'm going to claim Lojbab and xod for my side, even if they aren't > reading or understanding this thread or even if they think they > disagree with me! I doubt at least that lojbab would support it, as your side invalidates the only existing explanation of lo'e and le'e.
Lojbab doesn't understand it, as with most of jboske %^)Your argument makes sense, I think. Nick's argument makes sense, I think. I don't know if And's makes sense; I understood neither him nor Jorge when they argued the matter. But this is in part because this whole squinting metaphor hurts my eyes %^)
le'e broda to me involves making extra assumptions - that the in-mind properties of le'e broda, probably abstracted from a specific subset of broda, can be generalized to all of broda. If that generalization is valid, then lo'e broda would also apply, but if it is not, or if it is unknown, then le'e broda is safer and more accurately reflects what we are thinking.
I would tend to use lo'e (broda) for those properties that might be useful in writing a dictionary definition of the *denotation* of broda, whereas I would use le'e (broda) to invoke *connotation*, and of course connotations are culture and context-specific.
But what this has to do with squinting, I can't say. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@hidden.email Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org