[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
"The problem with that is, it's tenseless and worldless. But the
expression means different things in 1950 and now, because there are
different men in those two times in the world. In order to get the
intensional contexts to work later, Monty makes his predicates
properties: time contingent. So John is something that needs a
property, not just a predicate: \lP.\vP(x) (because once you've got
the timeless property, you need to convert it to a predicate for a
particular time and world. Monty does this all the time, and writes
it as \lP.\vP(x)."
...Eh, I meant \lP.\vP(x) = \lP.P{x}
--
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****
* Dr Nick Nicholas, French & Italian Studies nickn@hidden.email *
University of Melbourne, Australia http://www.opoudjis.net
* "Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity of locutional rendering, the *
circumscriptional appelations are excised." --- W. Mann & S. Thompson,
* _Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organisation_, 1987. *
**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****