Guy Steele on names as predicates

[lojbab (Bob LeChevalier)]

Guy is absolutely correct in that any name can be in many ways predicate-y.
In essence, all words are just names for concepts.  The difference in 
grammar between names and diescriptions is minimal - indeed you can even
say "la mlatu" - the one named cat.  However the morphology of names, and their
inherent incapbility of being compounded grammatically, also makes their
syntax simpler.  You don;t need the "cu" after "la mlat."  before a selbri,
you do after "la mlatu".

But the real point of names as opposed to other words is that names are more
overtly symbols than other words.  We don;t ascribe any real semantics to
"Mick Jagger" - it just labels an individual.  On the other hand, we try to
"keep up with the Joneses", and there are no individuals that we have in mind
when we use that idiom.

Most of the time, though, names are a conventional label for one or more
individuals, and there is nothing about that name that makes it especially
apprpriate or inappropriate, except in the mind of the namer.

(Remember that "cmene" has a place in it for the name-giver or name-user.
"smuni" does not - it is presumed that we are not Humpty Dumpty's such that
you need to know who is using the word to know what it means.  With many names
there is no clear referent.  Since there is at least one other Lojbanist
named Guy, who will probably be at LogFest, areference to "Guy" at Logfest
will probably not be the one who poste this comment.)

lojbab