Robin's gadri Proposal
Negations have a dramatic effect wherever they occur (and remember they can occur anywhere, not just first middle and end). In this case all that it means is that I cannot truthfully be said to go and implicitly the reason I cannot is that I didn't get anywhere (a bit hard to imagine, but then it's only an example. Another choice might have been better.)
xod <xod@thestonecutters.net> wrote:John Cowan wrote:
>Robin Lee Powell scripsit:
>
>
>
>>>Then, klama noda is not covered by the meaning of klama, making it a
>>>different selbri.
>>>
>>>
>>One way to look at it, and one which I would be willing to enshrine, is
>>that "klama no da" == "klama zi'o", which is, indeed, a different
>>selbri.
>>
>>
>
>No, that won't work. klama noda is equivalent to klama naku su'oda, which is
>a negative claim (it is about what is not the case), whereas klama zi'o,
>though the x2 has been dropped, is still an affirmative claim (about what
>is the case).
>
>
If that's the case, then it's incorrect to render broda noda --> naku
broda su'oda. Because "noda" surely should not have so dramatic effect
on the other places. Saying that I went lacking a destination is very
different from opening up the possibility that I didn't go at all. We
gain nothing but confusion with such a conflation.