Talk:Sortal

Sortal vs Count noun
What is the difference, if any, between a "sortal" and a count noun? Are they just alternative terms for the same concept? (If so, they should be merged.) Peter coxhead (talk) 00:25, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems that the two terms only overlap, with a count noun being purely a linguistic term, and sortal more complex. I think it is a mistake to lead this page with the definition that makes the two sound very similar. See, e.g., here. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:39, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It does seem that the problem is the lead section, which picks out only one of the properties of a sortal, and does not reflect the complexity of the concept. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The lead seems particularly difficult to write. The Stanford reference says "There is variation, in whether ‘sortal’ is applied to linguistic items, ... or psychological entities, e.g., concepts." The reference also uses the interesting term "notion", which I'm not sufficiently a philosopher to understand, but I wonder if that "e.g.," in the quote should be "i.e.,". In other words, are the other meanings of "sortal" describable as relating to "concepts". Is there a philosopher in the house? (Don't mean to insult you Peter, but I happen to know that you don't spend all of your time on philosophy.) Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:49, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I don't claim to be a philosopher in any professional sense. (As it happens, I think that Wittgenstein successfully debunked all attempts to give natural language the kind of precise meanings which would render concepts like "sortals" useful.)
 * I suspect that when the summary in the Stanford Encyclopedia says "our dissection of the definitions and discussions suggest that there are numerous distinctions in question and that while these distinctions have significant overlap, they are not identical" it's extremely difficult to write a sensible Wikipedia article, let alone a lead. A reasonable summary seems to be "Sortal is a concept employed by a number of well-known philosophers. However, what it means is not clear, since they have employed different non-overlapping distinctions, which may or may not be of any importance." :-) Peter coxhead (talk) 16:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * :) Thank you for not mentioning heads of pins. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)