[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xod: > On Wed, 25 Dec 2002, Nick Nicholas wrote: > > > The formal semantics mainstream answer, since 1974, has been to allow > > prenexes mid-sentence, whether there is an embedded proposition there or > > not > > Can you show us, with an experimental cmavo "zo'u", what mid-sentence > prenexes would look like? It sounds ghastly complex something like: mi sisku zo'u'o da poi pavyseljirna zo'u'u da where zo'u'o begins a mid-bridi prenes and zo'u'u ends it. But just because it's easy to implement doesn't mean it's a good thing. IMO, prenexes don't exist in underlying logic; quantifiers are simply functions from propositions to propositions. So in I know Ex broda(x) the argument of 'know' is E (existential quantifier) and the argument of E is 'broda'. So any predicate that takes a propositional argument can take a quantifier as its argument, and any predicate that can't take a propositional argument can't take a quantifier as its argument. So by my current thinking, the notion of bridi-medial prenexes as distinct from an embedded proposition is nonsensical. My thinking on these matters is hardly authoritative, but I could not accept a solution that I did not understand the underlying logic of. --And.