No Scope Creep: Difference between revisions
(Propose this!) |
m (Unbold some stuff) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
!Narrow scope | !Narrow scope | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |{{Deranize|bu}} | ||
|{{T|Bu tı tú poq}} | |{{T|Bu tı tú poq}} | ||
|??? | |??? | ||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
!Narrow scope | !Narrow scope | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |{{Deranize|bu}} | ||
|{{T|Tú poq nä bu tı hóa}} | |{{T|Tú poq nä bu tı hóa}} | ||
|{{T|Bu tı tú poq}} | |{{T|Bu tı tú poq}} | ||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
== Why not == | == Why not == | ||
[https://discord.com/channels/311223912044167168/334810940392341514/945302821178310736 uakci says:]<blockquote>i think, in fact, that serials being "unitary" verbs that don't radiate semantics outwards across the whole sentence is a huge advantage</blockquote>Maybe it is an advantage? But consider that even non-serial verbs can already radiate side effects: some can be undefined on certain inputs, some can create questions, and some (individual-level predicates) might even take scope. With that in mind, it's not a stretch to imagine that serials could take scope, too. | [https://discord.com/channels/311223912044167168/334810940392341514/945302821178310736 uakci says:]<blockquote>i think, in fact, that serials being "unitary" verbs that don't radiate semantics outwards across the whole sentence is a huge advantage</blockquote>Maybe it is an advantage? But consider that even non-serial verbs can already radiate side effects: some can be undefined on certain inputs, some can create questions, and some (individual-level predicates) might even take scope. With that in mind, it's not a stretch to imagine that serials could take scope, too. | ||
[[Category:Proposals]] | |||
Latest revision as of 15:03, 24 October 2024
No Scope Creep is a proposal to remove the scope creep effect from the language.
THE PROPOSAL: Just remove it.
Why
Here is how the language currently behaves with scope creep:
| Wide scope | Narrow scope | |
|---|---|---|
| No serial verb | Sía raı nä shoe jí, ꝡä kuq súq hóa | Shoe jí, ꝡä kuq súq sía raı |
| Serial verb | Shoe kuq jí súq sía raı | Not possible :( |
And here is how it could behave without scope creep:
| Wide scope | Narrow scope | |
|---|---|---|
| No serial verb | Sía raı nä shoe jí, ꝡä kuq súq hóa | Shoe jí, ꝡä kuq súq sía raı |
| Serial verb | Sía raı nä shoe kuq jí súq hóa | Shoe kuq jí súq sía raı |
This pattern feels clearer, and it makes serial verbs (one of Toaq's superpowers!) usable in more situations.
On that note, Toaq experts currently consider (bu), (ao), (he), etc. to exhibit a kind of scope creep as well:
| Wide scope | Narrow scope | |
|---|---|---|
| (bu) | Bu tı tú poq | ??? |
| (ao) | Ao muaqsho tú shıtuaq | ??? |
| (he) | He cho báq gochıq sía poq | ??? |
Officially, there is no way to get a narrowly-scoped reading of the quantifiers. There is one proposal from uakci that uses the syntax … (he nä …) for this purpose, but what if we just gave the above sentences narrowly-scoped readings?
| Wide scope | Narrow scope | |
|---|---|---|
| (bu) | Tú poq nä bu tı hóa | Bu tı tú poq |
| (ao) | Tú shıtuaq nä ao muaqsho hóa | Ao muaqsho tú shıtuaq |
| (he) | Sía poq nä he cho báq gochıq hóa | He cho báq gochıq sía poq |
There you go. I really think narrow scope is a better default!
Why not
i think, in fact, that serials being "unitary" verbs that don't radiate semantics outwards across the whole sentence is a huge advantage
Maybe it is an advantage? But consider that even non-serial verbs can already radiate side effects: some can be undefined on certain inputs, some can create questions, and some (individual-level predicates) might even take scope. With that in mind, it's not a stretch to imagine that serials could take scope, too.