[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xod:
> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Robert LeChevalier wrote:
>
>
> > 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 %^)
>
>
> It seems that if one squints at Americans and only sees one girl, that's
> e-gadri and not o-gadri. We're avoiding some bloody arguments about the
> requirements of objectivity; it's been amusing to watch people dance
> around the minefield with words like "veridical", and others get it flat
> out wrong by applying strict standards for e-gadri
>
> I will really understand what Nick means about lo'e as soon he relates it
> to jboske post 511
for people's convenience, here is msg 511 (sent by xod):
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, John Cowan wrote:
> Jorge Llambias scripsit:
>
> > Suppose you tell me "I need a box to put these books in.
> > Please get me one."
>
> mi nitcu pa le tanxe selcmi poi seltisna lei cukta
>
> > I would say: {mi nitcu lo'e tanxe lo nu setca
> > lei vi cukta ty i e'o ko cpagau mi ty}.
>
> I don't know how to supply you with the typical box, any more than I
> can capture the typical lion. That is, mi kavbu lo'e cinfo is false,
> and by the same token mi cpacu lo'e tanxe is false too.
>
> It occurs to me that some confusion may be caused by taking "lo'e cinfo"
> to mean not "the typical lion" but "a typical lion", that is an actual
> lion which closely resembles in relevant ways the abstract typical lion.
Jorge is referring to the statistical mode (sort of like a lion of the
type that is a numerical plurality), and John is referring something more
like the statistical average (an abstract entity, like a set). I think the
CLL defines lo'e as the latter; the former could be le fadni cinfo.
--And.