Received: from odin.diku.dk (daemon@odin.diku.dk [130.225.96.221]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id GAA06554 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 1995 06:32:47 -0400 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by odin.diku.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA02658 for conlang-outgoing; Tue, 19 Sep 1995 05:32:14 -0400 Received: from mailserver.iris.firenze.it (risc.iris.firenze.it [193.43.110.18]) by odin.diku.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA02650 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 1995 11:31:59 +0200 Received: from iris01.iris.firenze.it by mailserver.iris.firenze.it (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/950822) id AA16427; Tue, 19 Sep 1995 11:32:52 +0200 Date: Tue, 19 Sep 1995 11:32:52 +0200 Message-Id: <9509190932.AA16427@mailserver.iris.firenze.it> X-Sender: mmg@risc.iris.firenze.it X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: conlang@diku.dk From: mmg@risc.iris.firenze.it (Maurizio M Gavioli) Subject: CONLANG: The Click language and sets of sets Sender: owner-conlang@diku.dk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: mmg@risc.iris.firenze.it (Maurizio M Gavioli) Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Tue Sep 19 06:32:54 1995 X-From-Space-Address: owner-conlang@diku.dk To my question about distinction between sets and sets of sets in Click, doug@NETCOM.COM (Doug Merritt) replies: >It is not needed. It is reasonable of you to point out that >self-referential paradoxes appear to be allowed. It is not reasonable >to say that (a) they cannot be allowed, nor (b) that having multiple >kinds of sets (as in the mathematical Theory of Types) is the >only way to avoid such paradoxes. I have said neither a) or b); I have simply noticed that auto-refrential paradoxes are possible. You correctly point out that they are possible in natural languages. Whether this is good or bad for Click is something that only its author can define. My point is that, having defined the language based on set operations (albeit informally), some sentences exist for which these operations cannot be performed without contradiction (and please note that contradiction is another thing than ambiguity!) Then, some additional "rule" has to be introduced to deal with these sentences: 1) they are not grammatical, 2) they are grammatical and mean that the auto-referential barber always shaves himself, 3) never shaves himself, 4) is always chosen among peoples affected by alopecia, 5) ... whatever you like, but you have to deal with them. Additionally, you have to define in some way which words are elementary sets and which are sets of sets, even by a dictionary list (taking the place of the native speaker competence). Otherwise you would not know when and how apply the above rules (whatever they will be). Maurizio M. Gavioli -------------------- Maurizio M. Gavioli Associazione IRIS mmg@risc.iris.firenze.it via di Vincigliata 26, I-50135 Firenze - Italy phone: +39 55 603 251 - fax.: +39 55 603 383