[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, Jorge Llambías wrote:
>
> la xod cusku di'e
>
> > ca'e indicates it's on the authority of the speaker, but definitions are
> > larger than that.
>
> {ka'u} then?
Very nice!
> > According to Nick:
> [...]
> > lo'e makes claims that are generic and intrinsic to the
> > referent, i.e. "Lions live in Africa";
>
> That's not an "intrinsic" property, as John has pointed out.
>
> > "Lions live in Africa" is a claim in some way definitional of lions, or at
> > least characteristic of them.
>
> I don't see that it is definitional either, at least I don't think my
> concept of what a lion is would change if there were no more lions in
> Africa. It seems to me that it is just typical/characteristic. {na'o}
> would seem to cover it.
Perhaps the examples are weak, but the idea is clear.
--
The Pentagon group believed it had a visionary strategy that would
transform Iraq into an ally of Israel, remove a potential threat to the
Persian Gulf oil trade and encircle Iran with U.S. friends and allies...