From jorge@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xxx Fri Apr 16 11:34:30 1999 X-Digest-Num: 117 Message-ID: <44114.117.637.959273824@eGroups.com> Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 15:34:30 -0300 From: "=?us-ascii?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" If this is the case, then both the cmavo list and the reference grammar are >seriously misleading. I took it as more like "There is a set of boxes containing >at least one member, and I need at least one member of that set." I won't >comment on the symbolic representation or suggest alternatives, since my >predicate logic ain't what it used to be. You can't use the usual symbolic representation for that if by "need" you mean "x1 needs object x2". Allowing for events, you can put it into some form like: There is a set of boxes B and Need(I, (Ex x belongs to B & Have(I,x) ) but this is definitely not {mi nitcu lo tanxe}, it is {mi nitcu le nu mi ponse lo tanxe}. >> I meant the logical expression above, which is undoubtedly >> what the Lojban means. > >Undoubtedly? If there were no doubt, the whole le/lo problem would never have >arisen in the first place. Well, if there is any doubt that {mi nitcu lo tanxe} means Ex T(x) & N(mi,x), then I have no idea how {lo} works. This should be valid for any predicate, not just {nitcu} and {tanxe}. Besides, the reference from the Book that SwifRain posted confirms it. > I said that however confident people may >be about Esperanto, Interlingua, Occidental or whatever, I for one would prefer >Lojban to grow comparitively slowly for a while, so that we have time to sort out >glitches, especially in the pragmatics of the language. These questions about >articles were what I had in mind at the time. Yes, it would be interesting, for example, to get a list of all the usage that {lo'e} has seen so far. A good chunk of it would be my own usage, as I'm trying to describe it here, but seeing if and how other people use it can give us better ideas than trying to make up examples. >Oh well, look on the bright side - nobody has _ever_ managed to come up with a >satisfactory explanation of English articles! Not even in Esperanto, which has only one article, is the usage fully explained, but of course in that case it is based on the usage of other languages. We should at least try to sort it out in Lojban though. co'o mi'e xorxes