Re: Comparison of philosophical languages

On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 01:49:51AM -0000, Bryan Maloney <slimehoo@...> wrote:
> --- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Nowicki <andrew@M...> wrote:
>
> > "not" and "opposite" are redundant.
>
> Redundant with what?  Certainly not each other.  It is possible for
> something to not be something without being its opposite.
Ebisedian makes a distinction between the two. There are two different
roots for negation: my- indicates absence or "it is not the case that".
For example, my'- is the prefix used for the nullar number of nouns:
        jui'    a ball
        my'jui  no ball

The adverbial particle my'e means "it is not the case that ...".

But the other root, khe-, indicates opposition. It goes beyond a passive
absence, but indicates an active opposition. For example, _t3mi'_ is
"word", and _my't3mi_ means "no word". But _khe't3mi_ means "untruth";
i.e., it is the anti-word, that which is against the true word. A cognate
di-position is _okhe'o_, meaning "opposite to". For example:
        ena'rai okhe'o eTi'm3ni
        "Narai and Timeni are in opposition." (Narai and Timeni are proper
        names.)

Further distinction may be seen in the words:
        khei'   opposition, contrariness
        myy'i   absence, non-existence

The prefix _ji'_ means "yes", "affirmative", "it is so". So, for the
mathematically-minded, you may say the Ebisedian _ji'_ is 1, _my'_ is 0,
and _khe_ is -1.

> Is yellow the opposite of red?  Is blue?  Is any color not red
> automatically the opposite?
No.

> Does red even have a universal opposite?
[snip]

Yes! To a Bisedi, the opposite of red (ki') is obviously aquamarine
(`omei')! ;-)


T

--
If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one? -- Abraham Lincoln