[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [jboske] so, singulatives...



I will essay a full reply later.

In the meantime, though, I would ask what accommodation is made for
people who see the prototype as basic, and who see different dogs as
different avatars of Dog?

The stuff about myopic singularization and squinting is meant to show
how if your starting point is a many-membered extension, you can work
your way to the single prototype. But I think lo'e should just mean that
single prototype. It will thereby cater to those who take prototypes to
be basic, and those who don't can apply squinting to get to the
prototype. (Very possibly I hadn't made this clear enough, but that
was partly because I had been so unsuccessful in explaining the
notion of prototype-as-basic.)

In contrast, you want to insist on squinting as intrinsic to lo'e, insisting
that lo'e broda can only be the product of squinting -- i.e. a derived
rather than primitive concept.

I see this as an unwarranted metaphysical bias.

--And.