[peirce-l] Re: The Guerri graph about some sign relations.

[Jim Piat]

Dear Ben,  Wilfred--   Ben, I'm no grammarian and you may well be correct as to  when to use other vs another.  In any case I did not mean to dispute your use of "another".   I was mostly going off on a tangent inspired by Wilfred's speculations as to what the distinctions might imply.  I defer to you on the grammar.    Your comment below raises another related thought:    >>I agree about nummbers as othernesses. "Other" is not unlike an ordinal form of the phrase "more".>>   What I meant to suggest in my earlier remarks was that "other" was akin to the notion of quantity as expressed in  cardinal numbers and that the notion of sequence or order as expressed in ordinal numbers was perhaps more akin to the notion of thirdness, mediation, continuity and time.  Otherness I associate with secondness which I was trying to suggest might be associated with the notion of quantity.  These notions are far from clear in my mind but I think their interdependence (if in fact they are interdependent) may in part be explicated by Peirce's categories (as also be the source of some the disagreement as to whether or when a sign is a first or a third).   But I have no quarrel with your choice of "another" over "an other"  for Claudio's graph.  I was just going off on a tangent sparked by Wilfred's comments.    Sorry for the the resending your last post which I sent by mistake.  But yes,  the example you provided in that post,  illustrated the distinction or emphasis I had in mind.    Best, Jim Piat  --- Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com