[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la nitcion cusku di'e
Unique != Intensional. We had already agreed on that.
Yes, but... I think Unique can handle a lot of the jobs that Intensional is needed for. I wouldn't mind at all if we could work out a nice paradigm that separates them though.
I was just this morning (because you people have ruined Christmas Mass
for me too) thinking, "whatever the intensional is expressed as, it's
not only individuals and {da} that can be intensionals. It's also
masses and sets and the rest:
mi djica lenu da poi gunma loi marjrxodiumu zo'u:
mi cpacu du
I want some xodium (whether or not it exists)
It can be seen that intensional is orthogonal to individual by
considering "I need two boxes". I'm now doing this as "mi nitcu
lo'e tanxe remei}, but that's clearly not ideal. Another
possibility is {mi reroi nitcu lo'e tanxe}, but again it is
kludgy. So {lo'e} is clearly deficient to cover all the needs
of Intensional, but we don't as yet have anything better.
Another solution (which I think preferable) is to leave the gadcolumns alone, and go propositionalist.
I don't think that is a solution. We already have the propositionalist method at our disposal: if the predicate in question does not accept propositions, make a lujvo. That's not a solution if we want to be able to use any predicate and not just selected predicates.
After all (as I found in CLL to my
delight), prenexes by default go to the innermost, not the outermost
bridi --- so the default interpretation of {mi nitcu lenu mi tavla lo
mikce} *is* "I want to talk to a doctor, any doctor", not "there's this
particular doctor I want to talk to".
Yes, and you can say {mi nitcu tu'a lo mikce} for short. If you are
satisfied with that, you don't have a problem to solve.
Another solution, which I think easiest, is to do what we did with
{kau}: just stick a UI on, and say "wherever that UI is, we quantify
the referent right here, not in the prenex."
So,
{mi skicu loi xodiumu} presupposes that xodium exists
{mi skicu loi XVV xodiumu}: I describe xodium [which is in a world
where xodium exists]
Maybe.
(... is XVV da'i?)
What does {mi nitcu re da'i tanxe} mean?
I think there's a lot to be said for le...ce'u, though: I seek, using the template "X is xodium" in mind = mi sisku leka ce'u marjrxodiumu I describe, using the template "X is xodium" in mind = mi skicu leka ce'u marjrxodiumu? I draw some xodium = mi pixrygau fi leka ce'u marjrxodiumu? You know, these don't look half so bad to me.
But do you realise that that condemns you to say {mi skicu
le ka ce'u du la nitcion} instead of {mi skicu la nitcion}?
That's the big complain about the redefining of {sisku}. We
can no longer use it to say "I'm looking for my watch" in
a sensible manner.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 3 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU=
http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_smartspamprotection_3mf