Message-Id: <199411050341.AA07275@nfs1.digex.net>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri Nov  4 22:41:28 1994
Subject:      Re: Cowan weighs in #1: specific, definite
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Fri, 04 Nov 94 16:34:12 EST.)
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Nov  4 22:41:28 1994
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu

& he weighs in with his usual laser-like perspicuity, saying:
> DEFINITE (sometimes spelled "+definite"): a reference is definite if the
> listener knows the referent.  English "the" is usually definite.
> INDEFINITE (sometimes spelled "-definite"): a referent is indefinite if the
> listener does not know the referent.

I did not originate this definition of definiteness, but it was me that
stated it on Lojban list. So, I should add that (a) many linguists would
consider it an oversimplification of definiteness (in the sense that
_the_, the 'definite article' is definite), and (b) logicians, of
the linguistic philosophical ilk, seem (to me) to use 'definite' in
the meaning we are using 'definite' for.

> (But then again, perhaps I am merely expressing my confusion.)

Not unless I'm as confused as you.

---
And