Re: question about the degrees of the adjective

Jim Grossmann wrote:
>
> >        Comparison can be intensification, if I decide so. After all, Latin
> >didn't make any difference between relative superlative (the biggest of)
> >and absolute superlative (very big). The first is comparison, the second
> >intensification. My idea is just to add more meanings to the same form
> >(I don't care about confusion, in many languages confusions like that
> >exist in one field or another and nobody cares. My language is a
> >personal one, not a philisophical one).
>
> Jim wrote:    Yes, I see what you mean.   Looks like that part of my
> critique wasn't thought out.
>
        At least, your critique helped me to think more about what I wanted to
mean. It was useful for that.

> >I'm going to try and explain you the meaning of the absolute, as I see
> >it (didn't you see my other post with the lines explaining the semantic
> >meaning of the intensive and absolute? I think it would have made it
> >clearer). Let's imagine a couple of friends talking about others people
> >and their height (uninteresting conversation, but sometimes it happens
> >:) ). One of them is 1m65 (sorry for the Americans, but I can't use feet
> >to measure anything),
>
> No problem;   we get meters in our science fiction books, some high school
> science classes, and some track-and-field events.
>
        :)

> >The other is 1m80. The first one says "Peter is
> >tall (positive)", but the second one replies "Well, he is simply-tall
> >(absolute)" because in fact he is only 1m85 and that's not far from him.
> >Of course, the second one would explain then what he thinks, unless he
> >has already explained what he considers "tall". The idea behind this is
> >that the second person (the 1m80 tall one) considers himself tall, but
> >that's all (he is not a giant), so people near him in height are for him
> >"just tall (absolute)" whereas he considers persons tall (positive) more
> >for people between 1m80 and 2m00.
>
> Jim wrote:   I think Ed Heil's remarks about an "implicit standard" are
> useful here.
>
        Where can I find them, I don't remember reading something like this?

> >As you see, the absolute narrows the meaning of the adjective,
> >depending on the reference chosen (which is needed, like for a
> >comparative, or even a relative superlative).
>
> >        Well, I don't know if I'm very clear, but it's something I
> understand
> >well even if I can't explain it well.
>
> Your understanding will enable you to generate examples that will clarify
> your meaning once you get the conlang fleshed out some more.
>
        I hope so :) . Don't underestimate the confusion that is reigning in my
mind :) .

> Jim
--
        Christophe Grandsire

        Philips Research Laboratories --  Building WB 145
        Prof. Holstlaan 4
        5656 AA Eindhoven
        The Netherlands

        Phone:  +31-40-27-45006
        E-mail: grandsir@natlab.research.philips.com