Re: le/lo

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>]

On Sun, 2 Nov 1997 bob@MEGALITH.RATTLESNAKE.COM wrote:
> you are misleading yourself and others when you use
> `that which I describe as'.  It appears to me you more likely mean
> `that which really is'.

I take le's being non-veridicial, to mean that it's a description which
evokes its reference in the human mind, rather than a logical claim about
the referrent.  Descriptions are sometimes veridicial, sometimes
near-veridicial, sometimes metaphorical, but never random, except in the
speech of lunatics and misunderstood poets.  The fact that "cat"  doesn't
veridicially describe a canis familiaris doesn't automatically mean that
{le} applies -- if that were the case, {le} would simply be a particle
indicating that random irrelevant words follow.  The {le} description has
to evoke the referrent in the listener's mind, or it is non-communicative
and therefore useless.

Veridicially yours,
 Chris