Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
20:27 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General Misusing Terminology |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 | | (21) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Saturday, Jun 22, 2013 16:49]; edited by Nikola Predrag [13-06-22] |
Things become complicated.
One thing is a definition of the specific logic concept and what might be a proper name for it. Is the word 'aimless' missused in this particular case?
It is important to hear from the native speakers what is a typical use of the word, few commonly used sentences given as the examples for the use of 'aimless' could clarify why the 'aimless promotion' is a misuse.
That is the least what I expect from Steven who has started the topic - to produce such common sentences. The common meaning and use of the word in English language is more important than the logical exercises of those who don't speak English every day.
| | | (22) Posted by Steven Dowd [Saturday, Jun 22, 2013 19:33] |
Dear Nikola,
Unfortunately I don't see what that would bring. The meaning of this term is quite clear - "without aim". Hauke summed up excellently why the term does not make sense, and straining for possible semantic "fits" - I just don't see how that works to anyone's advantage. In fact, once you reach that point, you are reaching for any possible relevance for the term, and in that case it is at best a poor fit - although I still believe there is no fit whatsoever for the term.
I withdrew from further discussion because I think my point has been made, and I am not one to beat a point to death. At this point I think all problemists have the information they need to decide whether the term has utility.
| | | (23) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Saturday, Jun 22, 2013 20:56] |
Dear Steven
you have started the topic 'Misusing Terminology', not me. I can understand that it's contradictory to say that something is aimless if the one and only aim is to obey the rules. But it is quite commomn to accept a definition where some contradictory element is included as an exception.
I can accept a basic conventional definition that the 'aim to obey the rules' is not considered as the 'aim of the play'.
Technically, the only certain and always present aim of a play is 'to obey the rules'. Just as the only certain and always present aim of our existence is 'to obey the laws of our universe'. With such approach, what would be the meaning od 'aimless'?
But I might believe that 'aimless promotion' is not in the nature of English, therefore I would like to see few phrases which are natural.
| | | (24) Posted by Steven Dowd [Saturday, Jun 22, 2013 21:03] |
Hello Nikola,
I understand I started this, but I also felt that I had finished my contribution to this as well. But give me some time to think about this "challenge" of yours; I still think it would be a pointless exercise in semantics but I may well be jumping to conclusions.
I certainly want to thank you for your contributions, which have been well-reasoned and interesting. More (hopefully!) later.
| | | (25) Posted by Nikola Predrag [Saturday, Jun 22, 2013 23:07] |
Dear Hauke, you can avoid to lose a tempo or the other side can lose a tempo, but how can you win a tempo?
Pure tempo-move, for all I know, has the one and only purpose to let the other side to play.
Waiting move may have the additional purposes.
>(say a waiting move Ba1-h8 when everything else interferes)<
Such move has the aim to let the other side to play, that's not merely obeying the rules. If Bh8 has some purpose, the arrival to h8 has an additional aim. In that case, both parts of the move, the departure from a1 and the arrival to h8, have some aim.
In case that Bh8 remains completely useless, we might say that the arrival is aimless for the play, the only reason for landing at h8 is to obey the rules which do not allow to move Ba1 out of the board or to play Ba1-a1.
We might call it 'aimless arrival' but it's not interesting enough to get a special name unless something special happens on the arrival square.
The 'aimless promotion' h7-h8S shows the tempo-aim of the departure and the aimless arrival (both concerning the play). Since the rules enforce the arrival to h8, wP must land there and automatically promote. Choosing only one out of four options makes it interesting exactly because the 'aimless arrival' gets a new life exclusively to obey the rules. White has no use of landing the Pawn and no use of promoting it.
The second part of the move h7-h8S is the 'aimless arrival' (h8~) = 'aimless promotion', which is exclusively enforced by the rules.
The 3rd part is the choice of a piece (h8=S) with the aim of a stalemate avoidance.
| |
No more posts | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
MatPlus.Net Forum General Misusing Terminology |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
