negation

["Steven M. Belknap" <sbelknap@UIC.EDU>]

> For example small is not the same as not-big. In my playing with
> languages right now I put 'j' as being the opposite and 'n' being negation.
> so:
>
>       small = jbig
>     not big = nbig
>   not small = njbig
>
> Is it worth so much that opposite words should be on their own and
> develop freely? I have great difficulties understanding that...
>
> Could you explain!

reminds me a bit of the language in 1984 by Orwell - <Doubleplusungood> and
the like.

I am trying to see if my preference for having pairs of opposite words is
more than just prejudice. There are some words in English that don't have
easily accessible opposites (sweet, for example) But is this just an
implicit recognition of physiology or randomness?

I think inversion for some predicates is more complex than just "opposite"
or "negation"

Consider

red - green
red - white
red - black
red - (any other non-red color)

Each pair could be considered as opposites  by some reasonable criteria. In
fuzzy terms, some predicates vary from zero to one, others from zero to
infinity, others from negative one to positive one, others from negative
infinity to positive infinity.

-Steven


Steven M. Belknap, M.D.
Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Medicine
University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria

email: sbelknap@uic.edu
Voice: 309/671-3403
Fax:   309/671-8413