COMMENTS TOWARDS A MODEL AN AXIOM OF *IS* AS THE NLUQ
November 23rd, 2008, search relatedRelated posts :: MORE COMMENTS TOWARDS A MODEL - AN AXIOM OF *IS* AS THE NLUQ :: Yes, I Have No Holerons :: Axiom 0 and its Translation (1) :: Is it merely Trivially True?
COMMENTS TOWARDS A MODEL AN AXIOM OF *IS* AS THE NLUQ
(Natural Language Universal Quantifier)
BE IS NOT A VERB – NOR A STATIVE VERB.
My model not only rejects the classification of /be/ as a verb, it also
rejects the belief that the copulas: was, were, am, are is, etc., ever point to
anything more than a predicational representation of a changing existential
modality of the self-instantiated subject, whether the subject is the
signifier of a designatum or a nominatum.
Let us test our new model against some standard definitions of /be/.
Some Current Definitions of /BE/ from WordNet.
()
The comments represent the set of techniques for exploring the underlying
semantic and ontological meanings together with indicative behaviour of the
indicant in pointing to the existential modalities of the subjectival
constituents according to analytical indicant theory.
INCORRECT DEFINITION 1. THE VERB BE.
HAVE THE QUALITY OF BEING; COPULA, USED WITH AN ADJECTIVE OR A PREDICATE
NOUN.
example.
(a) *John is rich.*
Comment: The copula /is/ above is not attributing the quality of /being/ to
John. The proper noun John is a self-instantiating label that maps to the
designatum about which something is being said. Thus /is/ points to the
existential modality of John being rich – not to the fact that John exists.
*example*
(b) This is not a good answer.
Comment: Here the /is/ does not merely act as a copuletic linking verb as is
wrongfully claimed by the tradition. In this out of context claim /is/ points
to, or deictically indicates the antecedal existential modality of the
utterer or utterers of the answer, whose answering mode is judged to be not good
by the generator of sentence (b). The identity and existential modality
(tense, number, person) of the human nominatum obliquely referred to is dependent
on the context in which the answer was said or given. The words: This is not a
good answer, are deictic, because the determination of the referent or
referents depends on who has said that sentence, (who is the nominatum or
nominata) and where, when, and to whom the answer belongs.
INCORRECT DEFINITION 2. THE VERB BE.
BE IDENTICAL. TO BE SOMEONE OR SOMETHING.
example.
(c) The president of the company is John Smith.
Comment: Here both labels: The president of the company and John Smith
self-instantiate a single sentential subject into subjectival concord. The
indicant /is/ is in agreement with the sentential claim that both terms act as
alternative existential identificative labels of a singleton by adopting the
indicant aspect /is/ rather than /are/ if the labels mapped to separate notional
entities.
example
(d) This is my house.
Comment: Here the demonstrative pronominal label /this/ and the noun /house/
jointly self-instantiate into the subjectival concordance of a single
sentential subject. The identificative copulative /is/ (now reclassified by me as:
an identificative indicant) points to existential modality of the utterer of
the sentence as owning the singularised object which he designates as: my
house.
INCORRECT DEFINITION 3. THE VERB BE.
TO OCCUPY A CERTAIN LOCATIONAL POSITION OR AREA; BE SOMEWHERE
example.
(e) Where is my umbrella?
Comment: Here the indicant /is/ points to the absent existential locative
mode of the self-instantiated umbrella, which (if determined) might be
predicated by a string such as: ‘Your umbrella is in the hall.
example.
(f) The tool shed is in the back.
Comment: Here the indicant /is/ points to the existential locative mode of
the self-instantiated tool shed, which is predicated being in the back of an
antecedently implied structure.
IS is not an instantiational existentialiser nor an existential actualiser –
It is concerned with the WAY an object exists (or - accompanied by a negative
- the way it does not exist) – not THE FACT that it exists. THAT sentential
chore is handled by the subject name alone ( for example:The Eiffel Tower) as
ontologically interpreted and accepted as a real object by the reader or the
addressee based upon his or her antecedal knowledge of the subject.
