List, Charles: > On Apr 30, 2017, at 2:43 PM, Charles Pyle <[email protected]> wrote: > > Many years ago linguists chewed over the issue of whether the semantic > analysis of three place predicates can be broken down into a series of two > place predicates and discovered that the two are not semantically or > grammatically equivalent. > > ‘Bob gave a book to Sue' is not equivalent to e.g. ‘Bob caused Sue to have a > book’ > > I am not sure how this would impact the argument in formal logic, since > ordinary language and formal logic often part ways (e.g. ‘Bob is not unhappy’ > does not equal ‘Bob is happy’), but it seems relevant in evaluating Peirce’s > claim. > Yes, and CSP recognized this in his views on graph theory.
And, it further necessary to separate the structures of the grammar. The arrangements of the order of the terms is crucial in determining the meaning. Three particular nouns can form three dyadic relations - “John gives John to John” (Roberts, Fig. 5 p.25). Or, Four nouns can be arranged in linear order by syncategormatic terms: John sells a book to Susan for a dollar. (For CSP, this is represented by four blanks (loose ends) in the sentence structure) Or, more interestingly, is the possibility of a branched structure in CSP’s example of the four atoms of ammonia (Roberts, Fig. 6, p.25). In the branched graphic structure of the four atoms of ammonia, one atom is in relation to the other three atoms. In other words, the nitrogen atom is in direct dyadic relation with each of the three hydrogen atoms. In summary, 1. No simple rules of grammar exist between integer numbers and icons of relations, as you noted. 2. And, the grammatical role of syncategormatic words can play a decisive role in how the dyadic relations are formed. 3. The logic of the concept of a relation is extra-ordinary difficult to express exactly because the grammatical meaning of the categorical terms is changed by the syncategormatic terms. This was illustrated by the two figures in Robert’s book. Other examples abound. John S.’s examples are equally relevant. Cheers Jerry
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
