Re: Comparison of adjectives (was Re: Reviving an old tradition)

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Quijada" <jq_ithkuil@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 12:22 AM
Subject: Re: Comparison of adjectives (was Re: Reviving an old tradition)


> In designing the revision to Ithkuil (called Ilaksh), I have expanded the
> morphology of comaratives significantly, based on my discovery of how
> complicated and semantically ambiguous comparatives really are in natural
> languages, as illustrated in an ambiguous sentence like "She is
> healthier."
>   Consider how many meanings this can have:
>
> She is healthier [than she was previously, but she is still ill.]
Teonaht:  Sonent mim ly.  "Healthy some she."

> She is healthier [then anyone else here]
Teonaht (possibly):  Ta sonent ly.  "How healthy she."

> She is healthier [and so is now healthy whereas previously she was not]
Teonaht:   Sonent mal ly.  "Healthy now she."

> She is healthier [she was healthy before and is now even more so]
Hmmm.  Ya got me.  Probably:  Makssonent ly.  "More healthy she."

So Teonaht has to do it with modifiers.

> Another example:
>
> He sings better. ( = than he did before because he recovered from a cold,
> even though he still doesn't sing very well.)
This is harder, because it involves a comparative.  But I'll try.  It seems
to follow the same paradigms with some inversion of syntax.

Teonaht:  Mim makavent mal lohhtindro. "Some better now he sings."

> He sings better. ( = than his friend does, even though neither one sings
> very well)
Clueless.  Ta Tebnar mim makavent lohhtindro.  "Than Tebnar some better he
sings."

> He sings better. ( = than he did before because he's taken voice lessons
> and
> now sings well, whereas before he sang terribly)
Mal makavent lohhtindro.  "Now better he sings."

> He sings better ( = has improved through voice lessons and now sings very
> well, even though he sang fairly well before).
Mal imbe makavent lohhtindro.  "Now yet better he sings."

> Thus we see that the simple 3-way comparison of X, X-er, and X-est (or
> 4-way
> if you add in the equative form "A is as X as B") must cover a range of at
> least half a dozen or more semantic interpretations.
All this reminds me a little of the "modal particles" in German, where you
express nuances of meaning through words like "aber," "ja," "doch," etc.
That's the only way Teonaht can do it.

> There is also a semantic division between absolute value of a quality
> (i.e.,
> the statement is true regardless of one's knowledge or contextal point of
> view) versus relative value of a quality (i.e., the truthfulness of the
> statement depends on the context or point of view:
Again, the following would require modifiers.

> SENTENCES WITHIN CONTEXT OF ABSOLUTE BRIGHTNESS
>
> Light A is bright.
Fel li lyreb A.

> Light B is brighter.  ( = than A)
Ailly, Teonaht would have to say "ta A makafel lyreb B."  I'm a goner.

> Light B is brighter.  ( = than it used to be, even though it's less bright
> than A)
:(

> Light B is brightest.  ( = compared to A and B)
Hseffel lyreb B.  The context would have to supply the rest, I'm afraid.
What you have below is impressive.  I think my language experiments have to
stick to metaphors.

Sally

> Light B is (at its) brightest.  ( = at its maximum degree of brightness,
> even though it's less bright than A)
>
> Light B is (at its) brightest.  ( = that it can be, even though it's less
> bright than B, but brighter than A).
>
>
> ABSOLUTE VS.  RELATIVE BRIGHTNESS
>
> Acturus is a bright star.  (ABSOLUTE = null due to standard benchmark of
> scale not defined.  RELATIVE = true.)
>
> Alpha Centauri is a brighter star (than Arcturus).  (ABSOLUTE = false;
> RELATIVE = true)
>
> Alpha Centauri is a brighter star (than it used to be).  (ABSOLUTE =
> false?
> RELATIVE = depends on context, e.g., to me it's brighter than it was last
> month because I just had cataract-removal surgery = true, however, it's
> brighter than it was last month because I contend it is so = false)
>
> Sirius is the brightest star (of all).  (ABSOLUTE = false; RELATIVE =
> depends on viewpoint, e.g., if looking from Earth = TRUE; however, looking
> from a point in space other than Earth = depends = no way to assert truth
> or
> falsity of this statement by itself without providing exact viewpoint
> coordinates = does this mean this sentence should be considered
> ungrammatical or cognitively insufficient in a logical language?)
>
> The Sun is the brightest star (of all).  (ABSOLUTE = false, RELATIVE =
> [same
> as above sentence] )
>
> Sirius is the brightest star (compared to Arcturus and Alpha Centauri).
> (ABSOLUTE = true, RELATIVE = true)
>
> The Sun is the brightest star (compared to Arcturus, Alpha Centauri and
> Sirius).  (ABSOLUTE = false, RELATIVE = true)
>
> As a result of all this, Ilaksh has 18 different comparative schemas (nine
> relative and nine absolute), which I call Levels.  These Levels describe
> the
> comparative state of noun/adjective/verb A which in turn operate in
> conjunction with 24 new noun cases to specify the exact status of the
> "other" referent B (as in a sentence A is X'er than B, or A X's more than
> B,
> or A is more X than B).
>