[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
> Actually, I meant to conclude the opposite. The two branches > do look like the same thing. They are similar to the extent > that they both look like three snakes. In the same way, the > two pictures are similar in that they are both pictures of > three snakes, so they do depict "the same thing" Idiomatically, they look like the same kind of thing, rather than the same thing. Since each branch looks like a snake (ignore the 'three' for a bit), if they look like the same thing, then presumably they look like the same snake.
I think "the same snake" is not generic enough. They both look like Mr Snake, but maybe as seen from different angles.
But it seems to me to be perfectly normal to say "The two branches each look like a snake, but not the same snake", "The two bracnhes look like different snakes" (maybe one is short & fat & the other long & thin). This branch looks like a long thin snake. That branch looks like a short fat snake. Both branches look like a snake.
Right. They both look like Mr Snake, one looks like Mr Long Thin Snake, and the other like Mr Short Fat Snake, both being avatars of Mr Snake.
> If the teacher sets the > assignment: "write a composition about three snakes", won't > every composition have the same subject? Yes, and at the very same time they may have different subjects, depending on how abstractly/generally or specifically the subject is defined. But they do each have the same prescribed-subject and not different prescribed-subjects. For any two books, at some level of sufficient generality they have the same subject and at some level of sufficient specificity they have different subjects.
That sounds right. Two books about Nick both share the same subject generally, but each can be about different aspects of Nick so they have different subjects at another level. Same thing with snakes. One book can be about snakes in general, about a particular kind of snakes, about three snakes.
I don't have a solution, but any solution must reflect that fact, and also the fact that I can say: Each of my books will be about the same battle. Each of my books will be about a different battle. (without knowing which battles). So I conclude that Each of my books will be about a battle. is as ambiguous as a nonintensional example like "Each boy will kiss a girl".
Yes, saying that each book is about Mr Battle does not say
whether they will be about the same or diffrent avatars of
Mr Battle. I think we must appeal to {mintu nunda'a} and
{frica nunda'a} to disambiguate (or expand the tanru and
complete the x2 of mintu and frica, which is a pain but
doable).
I have abandoned Unique for this because currently Unique seems like a way of approximating the meaning, rather than really getting to the heart of it. It's undeniable that English can also say "It is shaped as if it were a snake", and although I haven't sat down and worked out exactly how to lojban that, it is obvious that it involves an abstraction and not a Unique.
Maybe something like:
ta se tarmi da poi ke'a tarmi ta romu'ei le du'u ta since
It has the shape that it would have if it were a snake.
though {ro} there might be too much.
[...]
We don't know exactly what properties Lex Luther believes Superman has, such that the belief causes Lex to fear Superman. But extensionally they amount to "to be feared". So to get the extensional reading, the selbri is moved outside the belief bridi. If we didn't bother about the intensional/extensional distinction on selbri, then we can simplify to: -fears LEdu'u ro me LA superman -is-to-be-feared -- -fears is a kind of 'fearful believing', a believing that causes the believer to feel afraid. Is it still unclear?
I'm not convinced that fearing Superman is equivalent to fearing that Superman is to be feared. If Superman is my friend, I might not fear him but fear that he is fearsome to others (and so they may try to hurt him). mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 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_stopmorespam_3mf