WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


posts: 2388

The notions of contrary and contradictory negation needs to be mentioned — and used.
In that context, some discussion of {na} and {naku} seems called for.
Otherness and oppositeness need discussions of "same area" (or whatever) and of scales.

posts: 1912


pc:
> The notions of contrary and contradictory negation needs to be mentioned --
> and used.
> In that context, some discussion of {na} and {naku} seems called for.

Yes, I still have to add examples. {naku} before a quantifier is
contradictory, after the quantifier is contrary, right?

I want to make a case for the {na} to have scope over quantifiers
to its right but under quantifiers to its left, rather than taking it to
always have scope over all quantifiers.

> Otherness and oppositeness need discussions of "same area" (or whatever) and
> of scales.

Right. I expect to extend those definitions a bit when I work on the examples.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


posts: 2388

A> Not exactly, though that is a case. A contradictory negation is an all or none case. Of the two, one applies and the other doesn't. Contraries mean at most one applies, maybe neither. Red and not-red are contradictories, red and blue are contraries. Presumably red and green are opposites, but that really needs a scale: moral and immoral are opposites and amoral is neutral (offically-- in practice it tends toward the immoral end). Most of these things only make much sense when the two itemsd involved are subsumed under a single concept — color, say, or evaluated behavior.
B> That may be a better way to go than having afterthought reordering of quantifiers, but notice we have it already with {naku}. Thewre are enough useful features of preselbri {na} to make keeping it worthwhile.

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:

pc:
> The notions of contrary and contradictory negation needs to be mentioned --
> and used.
> In that context, some discussion of {na} and {naku} seems called for.

A>Yes, I still have to add examples. {naku} before a quantifier is
contradictory, after the quantifier is contrary, right?

B>I want to make a case for the {na} to have scope over quantifiers
to its right but under quantifiers to its left, rather than taking it to
always have scope over all quantifiers.

> Otherness and oppositeness need discussions of "same area" (or whatever) and
> of scales.

Right. I expect to extend those definitions a bit when I work on the examples.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



Re: BPFK Section: brivla Negators
The notions of contrary and contradictory negation needs to be mentioned — and used.
In that context, some discussion of {na} and {naku} seems called for.
Otherness and oppositeness need discussions of "same area" (or whatever) and of scales.



posts: 2388

A> Not exactly, though that is a case. A contradictory negation is an all or none case. Of the two, one applies and the other doesn't. Contraries mean at most one applies, maybe neither. Red and not-red are contradictories, red and blue are contraries. Presumably red and green are opposites, but that really needs a scale: moral and immoral are opposites and amoral is neutral (offically-- in practice it tends toward the immoral end). Most of these things only make much sense when the two itemsd involved are subsumed under a single concept — color, say, or evaluated behavior.
B> That may be a better way to go than having afterthought reordering of quantifiers, but notice we have it already with {naku}. Thewre are enough useful features of preselbri {na} to make keeping it worthwhile.

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:

pc:
> The notions of contrary and contradictory negation needs to be mentioned --
> and used.
> In that context, some discussion of {na} and {naku} seems called for.

A>Yes, I still have to add examples. {naku} before a quantifier is
contradictory, after the quantifier is contrary, right?

B>I want to make a case for the {na} to have scope over quantifiers
to its right but under quantifiers to its left, rather than taking it to
always have scope over all quantifiers.

> Otherness and oppositeness need discussions of "same area" (or whatever) and
> of scales.

Right. I expect to extend those definitions a bit when I work on the examples.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail