From bob@RATTLESNAKE.COM Thu Sep 12 05:07:12 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: bob@rattlesnake.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 12 Sep 2002 12:07:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 90825 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2002 12:07:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 12 Sep 2002 12:07:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (140.186.114.245) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Sep 2002 12:07:11 -0000 Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.114) Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:07:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-Id: Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:07:11 +0000 (UTC) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com In-reply-to: <32.2cdbd283.2ab11bde@aol.com> (pycyn@aol.com) Subject: Re: [lojban] word for "www" (was: Archive location.) References: <32.2cdbd283.2ab11bde@aol.com> From: "Robert J. Chassell" Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810561 > * book (container of a copy of a work, possibly multiple volumes), > x1 is a book containing work x2 by author x3 for audience x4 > preserved in medium x5 > /:/ [x1 is a manifestation/container [a physical object or its > analogue] of a work/content, not necessarily using paper (= > selpapri)] > /:/ > /=/ cukta (cku) pycyn@aol.com wrote: ... Clearly there is no sensible restriction involved in the notion "work" either. [like `author', `work' may be plural] Ah.... I think of the Encyclopedia Brittanica, The Norton Anthology of English Literature, and the Bible each as being single works, although each has multiple authors. To me, a `work' is what is `put together', to be offered to the public. An editor puts a `work' together, perhaps with guidance from tradition (such as the guidance that specifies which parts of the corpus constitute the Bible in a particular religious tradition). Hence, that which constitutes an instance of a veridical book must be a singular `work'. (I know ... or at least, I can guess ... that you are going to remind me that that which constitutes an instance of a veridical `dog' may be of a `two headed dog'. But such a step takes us beyond the basic notion of `dog' into the cognitive linguistic territory that Lakoff discusses, such as `exemplar definitions' and `prototype definitions'. Lakoff's ideas are far beyond the current issue.) -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com bob@gnu.org Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com Free Software Foundation http://www.gnu.org GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8