Re: Locating a Sentence's Action in Time Saul Epstein Wed, 7 Oct 1998 09:04:30 -0500 From: Rob Zook Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 9:11 PM >At 07:34 PM 10/6/98 -0500, Saul Epstein wrote: > >>Technically, these answers are permissible truncations of full >>sentences: >> >> "(I spoke about QP) ? the beginning of my speech." >> <(lehe th'pra[COMPLETE]la [about] QP-he) th'pra[?]lahe> >> >>where the question mark is..,something I'm not clear on. Is the >>difference between the two answers that one specifies a point in time >>while the other specifies a range? > >Well yes. Maybe I'm not seeing clearly the same signifigance of what >you're calling concurrency. I see it as just a simple range (which >roughly means an *interval* too, hint, hint). Ah. So, we never left square one... >>Because neither performs the same >>function as the marker for complete concurrence... Maybe your >>staggering difference seems insignificant to me because there's an >>even more staggering difference between everything you're talking >>about and what I'm talking about... > >That seems entirely too probable :) Logical propositions are governed by predicates. Every sentence has one predicate that governs the entire sentence. Tense, Concurrence, and freedom from subordination uniquely mark this "top" predicate. It is analagous to a "main" function or a "root" process. It has subroutines but no calling routines; child processes, but no parent. Tense and Concurrence (when free from subordination) locate it, not with relation to any of its children, but with relation to the system clock. And in language, the system clock is indiscrete and continually restarts at zero. I think I will hunt down that text book. I'd rather someone else be responsible for the gibberish for a while... >>> We have to keep in mind that your average Vulcan likely has the >>> equivalent to a doctorate in the philosophy of science, and several >>> bachlorates in specific sciences, arts and/or engineering >>> technologies. >> >>Mm. I guess I have a somewhat more diverse picture of Vulcan. Not >>important... > >Well, I keep wondering about things like would Vulcan have garbage men? >Waiters (er.,by which I probably mean the "hash slinger" variety)? > >All those boring pointless work jobs seem like things Vulcans would >automate where ever possible. Boring pointless work is the essence of certain kinds of meditation, and one never becomes too educated to benefit. It seems a more efficient use of resources and energy to incorporate such into "normal" life rather than set up self-contained monastic institutions. In the absence of stigma, doctors too would sling hash. I do agree that Vulcans would automate wherever _necessary_. But this is a topic for the main list... >>Concurrence, as I'd >>like to define it, has the special purpose of relating a sentence's >>action to its tense. Whether either is a point or a range will vary >>with the topic and the nature of the discussion. You seem to be >>describing the specification of parts of actions or processes, either >>as points or ranges, for whatever purpose. That's important, >>worthwhile. It's NOT what I'm talking about, though it complements >>it. > >Well they seem really similar to me, can you describe what your >talking about a little more clearly (i,e. emphesising the differences >I'm not currently seeing)? It may be that the metaphorical description above is more clear in that way. If not, I suspect I have exhausted my capacity to explain, which is a personal disappointment. I will add (or repeat) that the entire business of contour seems to me to be a method for carefully relating parts of things to parts of other things. The parts may be points or intervals. I see that this can be well-used to complement indications of tense and concurrence. I don't see that it can subsume or replace such indications. >>> > >How does one define the boundaries >>> > >of the tense moment? >>> > >>> > Contextually. Tense is fluid and imprecise, which is largely why >>> > Concurrence exists. Vulcan is more precise than English, since >>> > it has more tenses. But from one sentence to the next, present >>> > may mean "right now," or "today," or "this year." Past and >>> > Future, potentially extending ad infinitum in their respective >>> > directions, are even less exact. >>> >>> Maybe I should rephrase that, can you give me a "text book example" >>> definition of "tense moment"? >> >>Not without a textbook. The only appropriate one I ever had was >>excruciatingly dense and dull, and the bookstore wouldn't buy it >>back. If I can find it, I'll quote you some gibberish. > >*grin* gibberish r. us = linguistics text book material? Heh. Not always, but often enough.. -- from Saul Epstein locus*planetkc,com - www,planetkc,com/locus "Surakri' ow'phacur the's'hi the's'cha'; the's'pharka the's'hi surakecha'." -- K'dvarin Urswhl'at