Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!world!jcf
From: jcf@world.std.com (Joseph C Fineman)
Subject: Re: The logic of "and" and "but"
Message-ID: <D4H6vo.JIK@world.std.com>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
References: <600434857wnr@shappski.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 23:07:00 GMT
Lines: 56

andre@shappski.demon.co.uk (Andre Shapps) writes:

>While doing nothing in particular it suddenly struck me that from a 
>strictly logical (as in maths) point of view, the words "and" and "but" 
>mean exactly the same thing.

"But" supplies some redundancy by implying something about the
context.  Occasionally, where the context is up for grabs, its use can
actually convey extra meaning.  For example, "He is a professor and no
fool" is a harmless compliment, but "He is a professor but no fool"
can only be meant to insult professors.

Such witticisms aside, redundancy is popular as a safeguard against
error; but what kinds of redundancy are required & what kinds are
permitted vary greatly from language to language.

> In fact there is a word in Russian "a", 
>which means both, although there are also separate words that mean 
>"and" and "but" respectively.

I think it would be more accurate to say that Russian makes a 3-way
split where we make a 2-way.  I don't think "a" can be used
indiscriminately in place of "i" and "no".  I am often in doubt about
"a" vs "no", but I _think_ the rule is that "a" implies a contrast
between two expressed entities, whereas "no" implies a contrast
between one entity and an expectation assumed to follow from the
other.

> Are there any languages that have only 
>the one word?

I don't know.  All the languages I have studied have at least one word
for "but" in addition to "and".

>Also, I have never quite worked out what purpose is served by using 
>articles. Quite a few languages don't have them and there seems to be 
>no loss of comunication. In all the time I have been learning Russian 
>I've missed being able to distinguish between "a" piano and "the" piano 
>only once and/but managed easily to route my way around it even at my 
>level.

True, articles are largely redundant, and many languages do without
them.  However, the invention is an old one (Hebrew & Greek had
definite articles in antiquity), and it is noteworthy that tho
IndoEuropean had no articles and Latin was conservative in that
respect, both the Germanic & the Romance languages have come up with
both definite & indefinite articles.

Once again, redundancy, of some kind, is clearly popular & arguably
useful.


-- 
        Joe Fineman             jcf@world.std.com
        239 Clinton Road        (617) 731-9190
        Brookline, MA 02146
