In a message dated 10/7/2001 1:46:55 AM Central Daylight Time, gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch writes:
The truth and amount Whoa! What does it mean to say that a ka is true? And what does it mean to say that it has to be supported by some nu (is suppose you mean {nu} in particular, not just any old NU). A ka phrase is just a reference to a property (or quality or -- terminology went crazy here a while back); it is neither true nor false. A propeperty (broda, say) may belong to or characterize a thing (ko'a, say) and that would make the proposition du'u ko'a broda true and would mean that the event nu ko'a broda occurs. {li'i} and {si'o} are still being disputed, but li'i koa' broda seeems at one guess to be something that only applies to ko'a and si'o seems to be something mental (just rough first approximations).
No. The difference are not modal at all (or so only as remote consequences of more fundamental differences): the notions of property, proposition, event, experience and idea, while not perfectly explaining the meanings of the abstractors, go a long way in the right direction and do not involve modalities. (Oops, I just thought of a way that the last three might actually seem to involve modalities. All I can say is that, at least for {nu}, that equation does not work.) |