[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 07:37:04PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 07:09:59PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> > > On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote:
> > > > Because stuff like
> > > > lo stedu be mi cu cmalymau lo'e plini
> > > > suggests I have multiple heads.
> > >
> > > Not to me. These words have meanings, they are not arbitrary algebraic
> > > symbols. If a human being mentions his head, I will assume that he's
> > > discussing his one and only head. Only the worst, uncooperative
> > [...]
> >
> > Well; let's take english, where there's a *right* answer which is
> > (at least moreso) undeniable. If I say
> > A head of mine is small.
> > or
> > One of my heads is small.
> > it suggests that I have more than one head. This shows that
> > regardless of what is true on the issue of le vs lo, your argument
> > that "The fact that we're talking about human heads makes it always
> > +specific" is bogus.
>
> I don't buy your argument from English because "a head" and "my head" and
> "the head" all have the same veridicality.
The english thing has nothing to do with veridicality. I said it
to show that the fact we're talking about human heads doesn't mean
we can't have constructs that imply there are more than one. I
wasn't offering constructive support toward my position, just showing
that your claim (which went above and beyond lojban) was false.
> I agree that "one of my heads" does imply I have more than one, in
> English, but I can't agree with you that "lo broda" should never be used
> for cases where only one broda exists.
I never said that either. "lo broda" can be used when only one
broda exists, for example, if the speaker doesn't *know* there's
only one.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
bin89FfBJQCcI.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped