Line 74:
Line 74:
<pre>
<pre>
−
Introducing the realm of "values" is a stopgap measure that temporarily
−
permits the discussion to avoid certain singularities in the embedding
−
sign relation, and allowing the process of "evaluation" as a compromise
−
mode of signification between connotation and denotation only manages to
−
steer around a topic that eventually has to be mapped in full, but these
−
strategies do allow the discussion to proceed a little further without
−
having to answer questions that are too difficult to be settled fully
−
or even tackled directly at this point. As far as the relations among
−
connoting, denoting, and evaluing are concerned, it is possible that
−
all of these constitute independent dimensions of significance that
−
a sign might be able to enjoy, but since the notion of connotation
−
is already generic enough to contain multitudes of subspecies, I am
−
going to subsume, on a tentative basis, all of the conceivable modes
−
of "evaluing" within the broader concept of connotation.
−
−
With this degree of flexibility in mind, one can say that the sentence
−
"f(x) = %1%" latently connotes what the sign "f(x)" patently connotes.
−
Taken in abstraction, both syntactic entities fall into an equivalence
−
class of signs that constitutes an abstract object, a thing of value
−
that is "identified by" the sign "f(x)", and thus an object that might
−
as well be "identified with" the value f(x).
−
−
The upshot of this whole discussion of evaluation is that it allows one to
−
rewrite the definitions of indicator functions and their fibers as follows:
−
The "indicator function" or the "characteristic function" of a set Q c X,
The "indicator function" or the "characteristic function" of a set Q c X,
written "f_Q", is the map from X to the boolean domain %B% = {%0%, %1%}
written "f_Q", is the map from X to the boolean domain %B% = {%0%, %1%}