Posted by Kazper at 8:46pm Jan 12 '08When referring to two or more particulars you have to (for brevity's sake) refer to the general which refers to them all.
When learning reality one has to take a descriptionist type approach. (Basically, do not try to fit things into any preconceived categories.)
An example of a new brevity scheme for my language: x1 [in time of present and in time of middle of (x1 x2)]
This is how I think it is and if it isn't it will be how it is in my language: a simple sentence consists of two parts: a possessive and a possessive. A simple sentence is sub divided into two particular categories of simple sentences: [particular possessive sentences] (phrases) and [general possessive sentences] (clauses).
The first possessive in the former is called a [narrow[ion](direct object of narrow) and the second possessive is called a narrower.
The first possessive in the latter is called a [subject] and the second possessive is called a [general possessive].
The second possessive in the former is conveyed to narrow down the first possessive.
The second possessive in the latter is conveyed for some reason other than to narrow down the first possessive.
The former can only exist within the latter (... maybe not. I think the majority of words are compressed phrases and I think words can truly stand by themselves at times), functioning as various things. Such as [subjects] and [general possessives], [direct objects], [lots of things]. When it's functioning as a [subject], for example, the narrow[ion] is a [narrow[ion] of subject] and it's narrower (which can consist of x number of phrases itself) is a [narrower of subject] (subject head and subject tail).
So, I think "The girl with the red hair" in "The girl with the red hair is attractive." is a sentence. In particular a [particular possessive sentence/phrase]. Even more in particular a PPS/phrase functioning as a subject with "girl" as the subject head and "the" and the [rest] as the subject tail (the narrow[ion] and narrower of subject).
I think another dimension to add (if it isn't already) to better contrast vowels and consonants could be... a phoneme's ability to stand alone (truly) as a syllable. If a phoneme can do this it's a vowel, if it can't it's a consonant. (I do think this dimension is recognized and used to contrast phonemes into vowels and consonants.)
If a word or sentence is ellipsed but understood to be there then the various categories that it may be filling... are still being filled.
Here's a conjunction I discovered awhile ago that doesn't not exist in English or is so uncommon to me that I'm not aware of it: [WD] = x1 [and x2]. It's x1 for sure but x2 is not for sure. So you can't say x1 and x2 or x1 xor x2 or x1 or x2. x1 or x2 seems like it would work since it can be one or the other or both but with this x1 is not for sure...
~Shawn Savoie~
~Ottawa, Ontario, Canada~
When learning reality one has to take a descriptionist type approach. (Basically, do not try to fit things into any preconceived categories.)
An example of a new brevity scheme for my language: x1 [in time of present and in time of middle of (x1 x2)]
This is how I think it is and if it isn't it will be how it is in my language: a simple sentence consists of two parts: a possessive and a possessive. A simple sentence is sub divided into two particular categories of simple sentences: [particular possessive sentences] (phrases) and [general possessive sentences] (clauses).
The first possessive in the former is called a [narrow[ion](direct object of narrow) and the second possessive is called a narrower.
The first possessive in the latter is called a [subject] and the second possessive is called a [general possessive].
The second possessive in the former is conveyed to narrow down the first possessive.
The second possessive in the latter is conveyed for some reason other than to narrow down the first possessive.
The former can only exist within the latter (... maybe not. I think the majority of words are compressed phrases and I think words can truly stand by themselves at times), functioning as various things. Such as [subjects] and [general possessives], [direct objects], [lots of things]. When it's functioning as a [subject], for example, the narrow[ion] is a [narrow[ion] of subject] and it's narrower (which can consist of x number of phrases itself) is a [narrower of subject] (subject head and subject tail).
So, I think "The girl with the red hair" in "The girl with the red hair is attractive." is a sentence. In particular a [particular possessive sentence/phrase]. Even more in particular a PPS/phrase functioning as a subject with "girl" as the subject head and "the" and the [rest] as the subject tail (the narrow[ion] and narrower of subject).
I think another dimension to add (if it isn't already) to better contrast vowels and consonants could be... a phoneme's ability to stand alone (truly) as a syllable. If a phoneme can do this it's a vowel, if it can't it's a consonant. (I do think this dimension is recognized and used to contrast phonemes into vowels and consonants.)
If a word or sentence is ellipsed but understood to be there then the various categories that it may be filling... are still being filled.
Here's a conjunction I discovered awhile ago that doesn't not exist in English or is so uncommon to me that I'm not aware of it: [WD] = x1 [and x2]. It's x1 for sure but x2 is not for sure. So you can't say x1 and x2 or x1 xor x2 or x1 or x2. x1 or x2 seems like it would work since it can be one or the other or both but with this x1 is not for sure...
~Shawn Savoie~
~Ottawa, Ontario, Canada~
Ruminations. - Kazper