For example, when a funds transfer system is provided with a 'feed' of transactions, each transaction provided is implicitly a speech act request for the system to execute the transaction. When this system in turn provides a data warehouse with a feed of executed transactions, each of these is implicitly a speech act assertion that these transaction have been executed. Finally, a query of the data warehouse might ask whether a given transaction has been executed. Syntactically, the contents of these 'feeds' and queries could be identical.

I wrote a patent application in 1999 for service interfaces comprised of pairs, the first member being a structure that described the speech act, the second being the propositional frame to which the speech act applied, expressed, for example, in XML.

Wm

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:20 PM, John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Leo,

For any subject you can mention, there are many volumes written
about it. That is one reason why I say that there is no such thing
as a primitive where analysis stops: it is always possible to do
a deeper analysis.

But don't give up. As Calvin Coolidge said,

CC
> You can't do everything at once, but you can do something at once.

For example, the difference between 'look' and 'see' is intention.
That's something simple we can start with.

This gets into speech acts, which are all intentional. In fact,
every "action" is performed by some human or animal for some purpose.
People do represent these things. Don't give up.