Received: from mail-ig0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]:38477)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.80.1)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncBCOZJTMR5YGRB7WPXWQAKGQETSIJMLI@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1XRSMf-0002is-Cw; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 13:50:14 -0700
Received: by mail-ig0-f189.google.com with SMTP id h18sf161332igc.6
        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 13:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to
         :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive
         :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=V6ROmiTPCX2m6wZ030G0lsnspuJW47YlPyjrOS3DIg8=;
        b=P1PjlazQhB37DM4HZ3bmCbZSgZeMcR/vS55MswnzXm4935qu55FFX48hpsTKyZ9N/4
         YCT0svYW5GwnIT7tDHz7v+LrhtNK8qG0VFcR9CjNCNn8q4NmRzMbbCAU+lA2wB+GgLji
         DObkpxlO128OmcOm4axeETavYYUC6c5Y6c9ASjVrIWSw9J+LAE+/UyTaKPRJkpCZrZnM
         cKCrjb7/nznRCRnRU5YxFxn9xpjZEQXwC/42Ee4qTJ/xkBHSftwXQJO02JtQ6qCYhVjH
         /h3nMPotOS4PrEk9m09UcPG2+aoW7quhGUv+R327RQHxHPa2LnHUejdCKJVLm9uO79LV
         Xy3w==
X-Received: by 10.140.84.73 with SMTP id k67mr184888qgd.6.1410295806785;
        Tue, 09 Sep 2014 13:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.140.94.231 with SMTP id g94ls2157596qge.74.gmail; Tue, 09 Sep
 2014 13:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.236.112.79 with SMTP id x55mr9822729yhg.21.1410295806553;
        Tue, 09 Sep 2014 13:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-x230.google.com (mail-vc0-x230.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c03::230])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ew8si522867vdb.1.2014.09.09.13.50.06
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 09 Sep 2014 13:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::230 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c03::230;
Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id la4so1565362vcb.35
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 13:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.52.156.100 with SMTP id wd4mr14252480vdb.39.1410295805972;
 Tue, 09 Sep 2014 13:50:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.204.203 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 13:50:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <540EFD66.2080509@gmail.com>
References: <540EFD66.2080509@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:50:05 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2e=6Z0i9biWYs4-59Z6aO85nKuhzaEF_NA0gukoaf3N1g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bpfk] {gunma}, {selcmi} and gadri definitions
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=pass
 (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::230
 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com;       dkim=pass
 header.i=@gmail.com;       dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bpfk-list.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/post>, <mailto:bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:bpfk-list+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe>, <mailto:bpfk-list+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+972099695765+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d2eb68b187f0502a8147e
X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--047d7b5d2eb68b187f0502a8147e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> As far as I know, gunma2 and cmima1 are non-exhaustive, in other words
> they do not necessarily show all the members of gunma1 and cmima2
> respectively. (Correct me if I'm wrong!)
>

 My understanding is that gunma2 is exhaustive (it's non-distributive).
cmima1 is distributive, therefore not exhaustive.


> So, I think the BPFK should make an official decision on whether {loi
> broda}/{lo'i broda} might include things that do not broda among their
> referents, and clarify the formal definitions accordingly if necessary.
>

My understanding is that they may not, but I stopped caring much one way or
the other since I stopped using loi/lo'i. The intended definitions are with
exhaustive gunma2 and selcmi2.


> I would expect them to never include things that do not broda. If so, the
> definition should probably be modified as shown below:
>
> =E2=80=A2 loi [PA] broda  =3D  lo gunma be lo [PA] broda .e no drata be r=
i
>

Not necessary with my understanding of "gunma". But there is another issue,
whether "loi" really should be "lo gunma", i.e. it introduces a new entity
distinct from its members, or whether it is just all the se gunma that will
serve as an argument of some selbri collectively. Giving a full formal
explanation of the latter is more difficult.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--047d7b5d2eb68b187f0502a8147e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Ilmen <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com<=
/a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);=
border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
 =20

   =20
 =20
  <div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000"><br>
    As far as I know, gunma2 and cmima1 are non-exhaustive, in other
    words they do not necessarily show all the members of gunma1 and
    cmima2 respectively. (Correct me if I&#39;m wrong!)<br></div></blockquo=
te><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0My understanding is that gunma2 is exhaustive =
(it&#39;s non-distributive). cmima1 is distributive, therefore not exhausti=
ve.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin=
:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)=
;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D=
"#000000">So, I think the BPFK should make an official decision on whether
    {loi broda}/{lo&#39;i broda} might include things that do not broda
    among their referents, and clarify the formal definitions
    accordingly if necessary.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My =
understanding is that they may not, but I stopped caring much one way or th=
e other since I stopped using loi/lo&#39;i. The intended definitions are wi=
th exhaustive gunma2 and selcmi2.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;bo=
rder-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">=
<div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000">
    I would expect them to never include things that do not broda. If
    so, the definition should probably be modified as shown below:<br>
    <br>
    =E2=80=A2 loi [PA] broda=C2=A0 =3D=C2=A0 lo gunma be lo [PA] broda .e n=
o drata be ri<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Not necessary with =
my understanding of &quot;gunma&quot;. But there is another issue, whether =
&quot;loi&quot; really should be &quot;lo gunma&quot;, i.e. it introduces a=
 new entity distinct from its members, or whether it is just all the se gun=
ma that will serve as an argument of some selbri collectively. Giving a ful=
l formal explanation of the latter is more difficult.</div><div><br></div><=
div>mu&#39;o mi&#39;e xorxes</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;BPFK&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bpfk-list=
+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list@googlegrou=
ps.com">bpfk-list@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list">ht=
tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--047d7b5d2eb68b187f0502a8147e--