«gaı»

[uakci]

"gaı": {
  "official": {
    "english": "▯ senses/observes/perceives ▯.",
    "gloss": "perceive"
  },
  "frame": "c 0"
}

Frame unclear from definition.

[Ntsekees]

The exact meaning of «gaı» should also be clarified. It currently has two lexical competitors in the form of lugāı and gegāı. In that case, semantic clarification and frame clarification go hand in hand.

[solpahi]

I recently concluded that gaı as well as related words such as kaqgāı should have the gegāı-like meaning, though your definition of gegāı has three places, and I'm not sure about that yet.

The frame should be (c 0) in any case.

Example:

Hủogāı jí pôaq sa háqrīaı "I heard a plate breaking"

You heard something break in the next room, but you don't actually know what it was. The above sentence is true if it was in fact a plate; you heard the event of a plate breaking even though you might think it sounded more like a glass breaking.

For (indirect) knowledge derived from one's senses, I propose kaqdūa ("see that ..."), huodūa (hear that ...) etc.

I'll need to think more about the 3-place gaı.

As for the English wording, how about " senses/observes/perceives state of affairs "

[uakci]

The frame should be (c 0) in any case.

As a result of a recent discussion with acotis (#36), I have learned that frames do not completely determine the formal type of a slot, but only its serial predicate behaviour. Does this apply here? That is, should concrete gaı₂ be regarded as correct? (From the definition you proposed, I can infer a ‘no.’)

For the example you gave, @solpahi, I'd refrain from using «gaı» and perhaps even «huodūa». I'd use a separate word that would include this implication of intuitive, somewhat involuntary deduction – for example, «sıugāı» or «dugāı». (If I'd been in the next room some time ago and saw the plate(s), I would reason in my conscious that it was the plate which broke, which would be «huodūa»; but if I inferred that instinctively because I simply know the sound of a plate breaking, or perhaps because it's reasonable to assume that it's plates and not cups that tend to fall off people's hands, that would be either of the two words I proposed.) Let's keep «gaı» to the direct information from stimuli and «…dūa» compounds to conscious conclusions drawm from those information… shall we?

[solpahi]

My example is not about intuition or deduction. It is about sensing (hearing, in this case) something take place. Something broke in the next room, and I heard it happen, whether or not I know what happened, I still heard the sounds it produced. This is while the event is taking place. Similarly, huodūa is supposed to be while the event is taking place: you hear sounds and derive some knowledge about the world from it. For what you described (going into the room after the breaking has occured and then deducing things), I wouldn't use either of those words. I would use a word for "deduce based on evidence", because you're combining a lot of different pieces of information to arrive at your conclusion, which is very indirect and analytic. The gaı words are immediate and direct.

[uakci]

For what you described (going into the room after the breaking has occured and then deducing things)

That isn't what I described, @solpahi. I described the situation in which I had been to the room before, and noticed an abundance of plates, and then heard the sound of glass breaking.

[solpahi]

Okay, after rereading, it seems like we agree on huodūa. Do you still disagree with my huogaı example?

[solpahi]

I have updated the wording of gaı's definition.

[uakci]

@solpahi, yes, I do disagree with it, since I think that the «gaı»-series words should all refer to the raw, unprocessed information, without any interpretation attached to it. (Or at least the least amount of interpretation possible.)

[solpahi]

Could you explain exactly where you think my example involves interpretation? I'm not sure whether you disagree with my view or whether you misunderstood my example, because as I see it there is no interpretation.

-gāı are "sense X" -dūa are "sense THAT X"

The situation in my example does not entail that the person knows or discovers any of the information in the lû-clause.

[uakci]

-gāı are "sense X" -dūa are "sense THAT X"

I understand from the above that «gaı» involves no interpretation, while «dua» does. If you agree with that, let us close the issue.

[Ntsekees]

I'm not having strong feelings on the argument structure of gegāı, I'd be also fine by splitting it into two predicates, although I'm short of idea for a compound for "▯ has perception ▯ (raw data/qualia, not a physical object or an abstract proposition)".

[Ntsekees]

If that predicate were e.g. daogāı, then dảogāı jí sa dé would not imply the stimulus is beautiful (or even exists), but rather that the perception itself is beautiful.

[Ntsekees]

As of late, I've split gaı into the three predicates daogāı (raw perception/qualia, including hallucination not originating from the real world), gegāı (stimulus, cause of a perception) and lugāı (acquisition of knowledge from a perception).

I tend to doubt that acquisition of knowledge from perception can usually happen without the intervention of prior knowledge, for example, when you hear the sound of a shattering plate, to identify it as such (whether or not it's actually what caused the sound), you first need to know what a plate is, and what kind of sounds it produces when it breaks, and so on.

kaqdūa is an interesting compound. However, upon seeing it, it gives me a feeling of luı semantics, as if it just meant "▯ knows ▯ through (possibly prior) vision", or so. Also we don't have a word of the kaq-huo-shıq… series for perception of unspecificed or multiple sources, as with plain gaı without prefix.

[uakci]

That is interesting. I, too, perceive gaı's spectrum of possible meanings linearly, so: qualia → stimuli → propositions (→ implications). Of course, all that's needed is for solpahi to pick one and assign it to gaı, then create compounds for the remaining ones of the bunch. (And same with the remaining predicates of sense.)