2010/3/14 Jorge Llambías
<jjllambias@gmail.com>
>> If you have:
>>
>> x1 expresses x2 to x3 via medium x4
>>
>> and you don't already know what "cusku" actually means, you will end
>> up saying things like:
>>
>> la djan cusku lo nu ri prami kei la meris lo nu dunda lo rozgu
>> John expresses his love to Mary by giving her a rose.
>>
>> Do you see why that is wrong?
>
> No.
OK. To see what the problem with it is, you need to understand that lo
se cusku cu sinxa gi'a valsi gi'a se smuni, whereas things that you
express are se sinxa gi'a se valsi gi'a smuni. You say or cusku the
signifier, you express the signified. The second argument of "cusku"
is a sign, something with meaning. The second argument of "express",
on the other hand, is a meaning. You don't express signs, you use
signs in order to express their meanings. "cusku" describes the use of
the sign, not the _expression_ of the meaning. It relates the sign user
x1 with the sign x2. "cusku" doesn't have a place for the meaning of
the sign, the way that "express" does. If you explain "cusku" as "x1
expresses x2", you are implying that x2 is a meaning, but in fact the
x2 of "cusku" is not a meaning, it is a meaning carrier, a sign, a
text, words.
Alright, I see your point. How about "state"? I don't believe it's being used, it doesn't have the "meaning" connotation of "express" nor the "verbal" connotation of say.