RE: [jboske] Re: xoi'a

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

pc:
> On a cheery note, I see a whole hadful of things turning up here and 
> in need of some sorting. So, around the claim "The horse is running" 
> there are at least 
> 1. a truth value (possibly different from {T, F}) (jei) and comments
> 2. a quantitative evaluation (I find the Olympic system easiest 
> here, but lots of others work) (ni)
> 3. a qualitative comment (the ones around so far -- presumably 
> related to 1 and/or 2 -- are things like "well" and "really badly") 
> (the other {ka})
> 4. truth functors on the basic sentence: "really running," "barely 
> running," "not quite running," that take different, but related truth 
> values to the original and may even be related loosely to 2 and 3
> 5. Something nebulous that both And and xorxes talk about --and 
> which may be one of the above obscurely put (or several of the above 
> freely intermingled).

I think I'm talking about 1, 2 and 4, specifically I'm suggesting
that a single family of truth functors can simultaneously handle
1 & 2. Not that it has to be that way, but it's attractive to have
that way as an option.

--And.