Re: Positive - Comparative - Superlative

On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Scott W. Hlad wrote:

>> One way might be to use a numeric system. Pick which end of the
>> spectrum is "first" and all the rest follow from there. This makes
>> for an open system in both directions with infinite levels of
>> comparison. Thus "first oboe" might be the bass, "third oboe"
>> might be the oboe d'amour.
>
>I was indeed looking for an open ended system. Also musette could be "first
>oboe" and english horn (really cor anglais which is neither english nor a
>horn!!) could be "third oboe." The trick would be defining the "anchor
>point" of course. But we do that inherently anyway even in this
>"conventional" system don't we.
Well, looking at things from the bass end of the scale gives one a
slightly different perspective. Anything smaller than a euphonium or
bass clarinet are just wee little toys!

The anchor point might be a tad difficult, especially if applied
universally: the smallest things are neutrinos and the biggest are
universes. Anything on a human scale would involve some pretty obscene
numbers for this kind of system!

>> For certain classes of ranked objects, you might consider making the
>> "bigger than the one above it" type relationships inherent in the
>> object's name. I.e., your conlang's word for "english horn"  means
>> "oboe that's one step smaller than the bass oboe". [If you use the
>> numeric system, it would also mean "second oboe", where "first oboe"
>> is the bass.] Mind you, you don't have a literal translation thing
>> going on. The word could be 'sqlart', and might be translated as "a
>> type of oboe", but to a speaker of the language, its relationship to
>> the other four instruments would be transparent. This probably doesn't
>> make much sense - I guess what I'm getting at is that size comparison
>> is inherent in the name.
>
>Using that we must then deal with "this oboe is bigger than that oboe" or
>"this oboe is bigger than that clarinet" or am I limiting myself in my own
>logic and thought?
Perhaps a speaker of such a language would never consider such an
utterance. The relative sizes being inherent and so obvious that
only an idiot (or a non-native speaker) would even consider asking
which oboe is bigger or stating that this oboe is smaller than that
one.

Padraic.