WikiDiscuss

pc:
> The hardest part of this section is going to be
> to explain the differences among {na}, {na'e} and
> {to'e} — indeed, the applications of each, never
> mind focusing on the differences.

The differences are not too difficult. {na} negates
a bridi, a whole sentence, so it is clearly different
from the other two that change a brivla into another
brivla.

> How is a
> contrary different from a contradictory when
> applied to a predicate or a term?

{na} is never applied to predicates or terms,
always to predications. {na'e} is never applied
to predications, always to predicates or terms.

> What is an
> opposite of something that does not appear to be
> scalar or circular?

Nonsense, probably.

> What is a neutral position
> even when opposites are clear ("The Golden Mean
> is best"?)?

When opposites are clear, the neutral position is usually
also clear. When it's not clear, it's not clear, there's
probably not much more to say.

> What do any of these concepts mean
> when applied to things rather than properties or
> propositions?

{na'e bo} is fairly clear, and has seen quite
a lot of usage.

I don't have much of an idea as to what {to'e bo} and
{no'e bo} mean.

> There are some clear cases for
> each, but generalization is not clear. Do
> semantic fields play a role here and what are the
> crucial factors (even if fields are involved
> somehow)? Until these questions are dealt with,
> this category seems basically unattended.

I still have to add examples, but I'm not sure I'll be
able to flesh out the definitions themselves much more than
what's there. (Except for a few more things I have to write
for {na}, but not so much on its meaning as on its syntax.)
I welcome suggestions for improvement.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com