Re: “On the Paradigm of Experience Appro priate for Semiotic”

* Comments on the Peirce List slow reading of Joseph Ransdell,
   "On the Paradigm of Experience Appropriate for Semiotic",
   http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/ransdell/paradigm.htm

Re: Comments by Jerry Chandler

Peirce used the term "elementary relation" to refer to a single element of a relation.
He often used syntactic forms like a:b, a:b:c, a:b:c:d, etc. for the ordered k-tuples
that we more often write today as (a, b), (a, b, c), (a, b, c, d), etc.  I have often
used that terminology, but with reservations, as it is currently used in model theory
for something else entirely. So I thought to use "relation element" as an alternative
term for a single element of a relation, leaving me to use "sign relation element" as
a way of referring to a single element of a sign relation.

-- 

facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
knol profile: http://knol.google.com/k/Jon-Awbrey#
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
polmic: www.policymic.com/profiles/1110/Jon-Awbrey