Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400e:c02::231 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400e:c02::231;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2dZ1Eb4XjTvXJMtJBtxS-vbuBLmVYGBbsCMGe0SOoxkLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b15b8cb4-2f0f-45e4-b630-6480ed7d4654@googlegroups.com>
	<CAO7tK2f76zV9SD36y4sNaAc+rAx_h6VYpyumgwPTYu43urOfJQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPkzLyky2YMQfW-JF-tk+7b_LwMt6bwngZTBwym-1ov=vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2d+jG=uYH4Z+mMuW=CRmH=XnDSH0wZQBfgaguYDi97LPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPkmVs-vhaPMq1Gp23ze8hg3fmdDw-D8WurzCY4e8zPLwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2csEZWF3QqXMW7dnVx28yCt6GWe60buRHMSd5t1yyXSaw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPnyQjbJzJfZUxZ8RgaXq0MiKVK_KFv53nYwBCzDj-MuzA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2dZ1Eb4XjTvXJMtJBtxS-vbuBLmVYGBbsCMGe0SOoxkLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 01:58:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CACf3dPkZXU_eTnEFmBQsoO4hnEMtkCZnE6q-fw7DB9viTu4QZw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Speaker specificity: {.i da'i na vajni}
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb208bccb52ec050429c36d
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--e89a8fb208bccb52ec050429c36d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 29 Sep 2014 01:33, "Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas" <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:33 PM, And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't know what having "nonspecific referents" is. If a specific
referent is one underdetermined by the description, is a nonspecific one
one that is fully determined by the description, e.g. a generic?
>
> Nice. Is "underdetermined by the description" a common definition or test
for specificity?

It's the definition I would offer, but I arrive at it from my own
lucubration rather than from the literature, which I'm simply unfamiliar
with. Ironically (what with the long-standing involvement with Lojban) I
don't know much about logical semantics; syntax and phonology are more my
thing.

>  I'm not sure it excludes generics though. In:
>
>  "Certain things are better left unsaid."
>
> would you agree that "certain things" is +specific and +generic?

I think it depends on your definition of genericity. Certainly your example
can be paraphrased as "certain kinds of thing", which would make a good
criterion for genericity. But anyway, I'd meant not to say that specificity
is incompatible with genericity but rather only that generics provide good
examples of referents fully determined by the description, as in "Tuesday
is the day after Monday".

--And.

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--e89a8fb208bccb52ec050429c36d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On 29 Sep 2014 01:33, &quot;Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto=
:jjllambias@gmail.com">jjllambias@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:33 PM, And Rosta &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:and.=
rosta@gmail.com">and.rosta@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; I don&#39;t know what having &quot;nonspecific referents&quot; is.=
 If a specific referent is one underdetermined by the description, is a non=
specific one one that is fully determined by the description, e.g. a generi=
c?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Nice. Is &quot;underdetermined by the description&quot; a common defin=
ition or test for specificity?</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">It&#39;s the definition I would offer, but I arrive at it fr=
om my own lucubration rather than from the literature, which I&#39;m simply=
 unfamiliar with. Ironically (what with the long-standing involvement with =
Lojban) I don&#39;t know much about logical semantics; syntax and phonology=
 are more my thing.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt;=C2=A0 I&#39;m not sure it excludes generics though. In:=
<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; =C2=A0&quot;Certain things are better left unsaid.&quot;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; would you agree that &quot;certain things&quot; is +specific and +gene=
ric?</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">I think it depends on your definition of genericity. Certain=
ly your example can be paraphrased as &quot;certain kinds of thing&quot;, w=
hich would make a good criterion for genericity. But anyway, I&#39;d meant =
not to say that specificity is incompatible with genericity but rather only=
 that generics provide good examples of referents fully determined by the d=
escription, as in &quot;Tuesday is the day after Monday&quot;.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">--And.<br>
</p>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--e89a8fb208bccb52ec050429c36d--