Received: from mail-wg0-f59.google.com ([74.125.82.59]:56900)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.80.1)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncBDNZFNNFVAHRBCMVRCRQKGQEU2H4COY@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1XoBCS-0003QM-QI; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:43 -0800
Received: by mail-wg0-f59.google.com with SMTP id y10sf811885wgg.14
        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-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
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=pt9ImQ2bH0dokIspasax2vjYgF0Wj6btqEmi+cVIp7o=;
        b=CAr0k6dLfWx4NWoihH3GRNPpTmzaSqGoJrElNkRHgtARUQ+L+tDmWdh8/OiV6NHlZH
         mADLfuzz2EpuMCz/n7ydTR93YNEED9BXg6F2zSQIjRHEFuZJf+szy53Rf1z81FpDUx39
         PhWsxbnaaw4srFNUNU34FX9UK12I6pu454DuWiXfKPg0o4WLgqxevLCz2Arxzqh8pori
         zEm2pCyklsN01rNFnyC8xLRV6toKxjqiqBc88Nde+2cytsrlYjMoKfBlQYP0/Z2dqh1E
         ga4nOdqP0ATzbScMegpOsewWcvkdkhbdl/xs0CzUcVUw7I4we1DpLfj/32BznJ4lOArK
         BiJQ==
X-Received: by 10.152.7.143 with SMTP id j15mr517873laa.0.1415711369922;
        Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:29 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.152.27.41 with SMTP id q9ls473638lag.67.gmail; Tue, 11 Nov
 2014 05:09:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.112.163.229 with SMTP id yl5mr22117lbb.23.1415711369335;
        Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x233.google.com (mail-wg0-x233.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c00::233])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l4si833897wif.2.2014.11.11.05.09.29
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:29 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::233;
Received: by mail-wg0-f51.google.com with SMTP id l18so11830286wgh.10
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.180.205.196 with SMTP id li4mr41309535wic.63.1415711369197;
        Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.208] ([95.147.224.70])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id gy4sm17443408wib.11.2014.11.11.05.09.26
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:09:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54620A89.6060205@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 13:09:29 +0000
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120711 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [bpfk] {ro}, existential import and De Morgan
References: <c2b90d96-7b89-4633-bc33-6e42b16d705c@googlegroups.com> <20141018011419.GF12268@mercury.ccil.org> <97AABFB42A204E5D97A4EDFEA57A8508@gmail.com> <20141019012930.GF12991@mercury.ccil.org> <676B49242B0D4F6A986D6AFEA1EB3B3C@gmail.com> <20141019170808.GJ12991@mercury.ccil.org> <c610baca-170b-480d-aa30-a26e2c6fc793@googlegroups.com> <20141109004632.GL6360@mercury.ccil.org> <CACf3dPkHuWfRwr1MxeZmRTfbE1TkkHER7WxUmo7FewKUCZ1jog@mail.gmail.com> <acbd142e-f5ec-4e49-ae5c-0da8cb1b3813@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <acbd142e-f5ec-4e49-ae5c-0da8cb1b3813@googlegroups.com>
X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=pass
 (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::233
 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@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: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

mukti, On 09/11/2014 18:34:
> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:42:50 AM UTC-3, And Rosta wrote:
>
>     1. What does ro mean, and does it have EI? (A question settled a doze=
n years ago.)
>     2. Should there be a non-EI universal quantifier?
>     3. Should there be an EI universal quantifier? This is the question J=
ohn seems to be addressing.
>
>     4. In any bpfk revision of the CLL specification, which meaning shoul=
d be paired with the phonological form /ro/?
>
> I believe that #1 and #4 are the question I'm trying to ask -- which
> hopefully have the same answer -- and I'm sorry if I invited the
> detour into other questions.

I felt that in response to you asking Question #1, John was answering Quest=
ion #3. But considering the rivers of sweat that went into answering the qu=
estion a dozen years ago, I think anyone unwilling to consider it a settled=
 question should reread the old discussion and engage with the reasoning th=
erein. (I can't remember it.)

> CLL 16.8 says:
>
>     sumti of the type =E2=80=9Cro da poi klama=E2=80=9D requires that the=
re are things which =E2=80=9Cklama=E2=80=9D

I would have thought that under that view, "no da poi klama" likewise requi=
res that there are things which "klama". That is, it's the "da poi" rather =
than the "ro" that has EI. Hence, for instance, {lo'i (ro) broda} doesn't e=
ntail {lo'i su'o broda} and doesn't exclude {lo'i no broda}. Whether EI "da=
 poi" is consistent with CLL and logic, I no longer have the powers to opin=
e on. IIRC, xorxes thinks "lo broda" is inconsistent with "lo no broda", so=
 if "ro/no da poi broda" =3D "ro/no (lo) broda" then xorxes must think "da =
poi" has EI.

> It's not entirely explicit in the section what the consequences when
> the requirements of the sumti are not met. I have assumed that
> according to this requirement, {ro da poi klama cu pavyseljirna} is
> then considered to be false in the case of {no da klama}. (If it has
> another truth value which is neither true nor false, then I'm barking
> up the wrong tree!)

If I may dare to presume to venture to second-guess xorxes, I think he migh=
t view the EI as presupposed, in which case {ro da poi klama cu pavyseljirn=
a} would have a truth value only when {su'o da klama} is true. And in that =
case -- i.e. in the case of that view being deemed correct -- you would be =
barking up the wrong tree.

[...]
> If I have made a mistake in my reasoning, please point it out.
> Otherwise, I will assume that BPFK has settled questions #1 and #4
> per the equivalence for {ro da} =3D=3D {naku su'o da naku} on the
> "Inexact Numbers" page.

I think your assumption/conclusion is correct. But it may additionally be t=
he case that restricted da presupposes EI.

--And.

--=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.