Talking about things that don't exist, means talking
about a world that is not the common, everyday one,
and may have its own laws.

In fairy tales, the step (the clutch) between common
world and fairy world is "Once upon a time" for ex.
This means that from now on, we're talking about a
different world.

My idea was to have a "fictional" mode at hand, if
needed, so you don't have to remember all the time
"did the speaker say 'Once upon a time' or didn't he
?". But usually one can do without, because aftter
reading or listening only a few sentences, you easily
understand by yourself that it's about a fairy world
(or an SF one, or any imaginary world). It's just the
same as for irony: you donn't have to see a flag
marked "THIS IS IRONY" to understand that it is.

--- Jonathan Knibb <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Henrik Theiling wrote:
> >>>
> [I wrote with respect to T4 (Telona):]
> > - an utterance consists of a single phrase, and is
> interpreted as
> > the assertion of the existence of at least one
> referent of that
> > phrase
> Hmm, I don't know whether I understand that.  How to
> you say: 'Goblins
> never sleep?' (assuming that goblins don't exist)
> <<<
>
> By creating a referent which means 'the generality
> of goblins at all
> places and times', modifying it by 'is something
> other than asleep',
> and then asserting the existence of the resulting
> modified referent -
> that is, 'there exists a group of all goblins which
> is other than
> asleep'.  In T4 interlinear notation, {gen góblin
> not + asleep.}.
>
> If the point of your question was "how do you talk
> about things that
> don't exist?", then there are a number of possible
> answers.  In the
> above example, either goblins do exist as far as the
> speaker is
> concerned, or the sentence concerns a fictional
> world in which goblins
> exist.  In either case, goblins do exist from the
> point of view of
> sentence construction.
>
> One could also wonder how to talk about a
> counterfactual situation:
> "If X had won the election, I would have left the
> country."  There is
> more than one solution here, but the principle is to
> embed the
> counterfactual referent within a phrase whose head
> is a marker of
> counterfactuality.
>
> Does that answer the question?
>
> Jonathan.

--- Jonathan Knibb <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Henrik Theiling wrote:
> >>>
> [I wrote with respect to T4 (Telona):]
> > - an utterance consists of a single phrase, and is
> interpreted as
> > the assertion of the existence of at least one
> referent of that
> > phrase
> Hmm, I don't know whether I understand that.  How to
> you say: 'Goblins
> never sleep?' (assuming that goblins don't exist)
> <<<
>
> By creating a referent which means 'the generality
> of goblins at all
> places and times', modifying it by 'is something
> other than asleep',
> and then asserting the existence of the resulting
> modified referent -
> that is, 'there exists a group of all goblins which
> is other than
> asleep'.  In T4 interlinear notation, {gen góblin
> not + asleep.}.
>
> If the point of your question was "how do you talk
> about things that
> don't exist?", then there are a number of possible
> answers.  In the
> above example, either goblins do exist as far as the
> speaker is
> concerned, or the sentence concerns a fictional
> world in which goblins
> exist.  In either case, goblins do exist from the
> point of view of
> sentence construction.
>


=====
Philippe Caquant

"High thoughts must have high language." (Aristophanes, Frogs)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html