Subject: Re: [lojban] word for "www" (was: Archive location.)

From: "Robert J. Chassell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:07:11 +0000 (UTC)

> * book (container of a copy of a work, possibly multiple volumes),
> x1 is a book containing work x2 by author x3 for audience x4
> preserved in medium x5
> /:/ [x1 is a manifestation/container [a physical object or its
> analogue] of a work/content, not necessarily using paper (=
> selpapri)]
> /:/
> /=/ cukta (cku)

[email-masked] wrote:

...
Clearly there is no sensible restriction involved in the notion
"work" either. [like `author', `work' may be plural]

Ah.... I think of the Encyclopedia Brittanica, The Norton Anthology
of English Literature, and the Bible each as being single works,
although each has multiple authors.

To me, a `work' is what is `put together', to be offered to the
public. An editor puts a `work' together, perhaps with guidance from
tradition (such as the guidance that specifies which parts of the
corpus constitute the Bible in a particular religious tradition).

Hence, that which constitutes an instance of a veridical book must be
a singular `work'.

(I know ... or at least, I can guess ... that you are going to remind
me that that which constitutes an instance of a veridical `dog' may be
of a `two headed dog'. But such a step takes us beyond the basic
notion of `dog' into the cognitive linguistic territory that Lakoff
discusses, such as `exemplar definitions' and `prototype definitions'.
Lakoff's ideas are far beyond the current issue.)

-- 
Robert J. Chassell [email-masked] [email-masked]
Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com
Free Software Foundation http://www.gnu.org GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8