Re: A question and introduction

Andy Canivet scripsit:

> When I say something like "I see no-house," it almost implies that there is
> a house shaped hole in the universe, because I see "no-house" and I don't
> see "no-elephant"...
I think you're overinterpreting the nullary number (which in Lojban is done
with the number zero).  Just take it as "I see zero houses", "I see zero
elephants".  In German one doesn't say "I don't see an apple", one says
"I see no apples".

> Similarly, some other object could be implied instead -
> although the same argument works in English to a lesser extent.  If I don't
> see a cat, then it is possible that I do see a dog - but if I see a no-cat,
> it almost implies that I see *something* but it just isn't a cat.
Lojban makes this distinction very sharp.  It is one thing to see zero cats,
and quite another to see a non-cat.  When you see zero cats, that is another
way of denying that you see some (1 or more) cats; it asserts what is not
the case.  "I see a non-cat" is a scalar negation: it means that you see
something that belongs on the same scale with cats, but at a different
point.  (It isn't obvious what this scale is; "I see a non-white object"
makes it fairly clear that it is *some* color or other, just not white.)

--
John Cowan <jcowan@...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_