Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 21:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <71d432ed-e8be-4635-8d9a-ec45ceff9717@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2eVeYMMVUdS_i1iGoN1mDLRKPMmPjYzTefdWu03GZGYwQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOQ8VDXfPXR1AThWEZ8RuVentjDjvLmdQb5w6HsjK6Ozt-vX0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <d50a7611-d7d1-4a03-b2e6-c3c4d7f5d96e@googlegroups.com>
 <CAO7tK2f+0qhumL5NSpZNLS+gTVkBJ_M5yymXUmJr9iFcQA1rFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <35617c5d-9a97-45d0-b1a0-9617e14bdec9@googlegroups.com>
 <CAO7tK2eVeYMMVUdS_i1iGoN1mDLRKPMmPjYzTefdWu03GZGYwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bpfk] Re: FA as a TAG (Was: One cannot refer to inner nodes in
 Lojban PEG)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_683_530982007.1428639916214"
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.8
X-Spam_score_int: -17
X-Spam_bar: -

------=_Part_683_530982007.1428639916214
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_684_1420038364.1428639916214"

------=_Part_684_1420038364.1428639916214
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Le vendredi 10 avril 2015 08:56:56 UTC+9, xorxes a =C3=A9crit :
>
>
>
> So "citkrfa" means something like "x1 is the eater in x2", "citkrfe" mean=
s=20
> "x1 is what gets eaten in x2", and so on. Then I think "du'u" does make=
=20
> sense:
>
> citkrfa: x1 is that which proposition x2 claims eats.
> citkrfe: x1 is that which proposition x2 claims is eaten.
>
> Events could also make sense:
>
> citkrfa: x1 is what eats when x2 happens.
> citkrfe: x1 is what is eaten when x2 happens.
>
> Or a property:
>
> citkrfa: x1 eats when it has property x2
> citkrfe: x1 is eaten when it has property x2
>
>
I want to avoid using {du'u} for the following reason.

a formulation like

> citkrfa: x1 is that which proposition x2 claims eats. ......F1

makes sense, but is not suitable for the interpretation of

fa ko'a citka ko'e =3D=3D=3D fi'o citkrfa ko'a citka ko'e ......S1

which is derived from what la_tsani stated.=20
F1 brings an ambiguity of interpretation that is shared with {fi'o citka be=
=20
ko'e ko'a} or any BAI/{fi'o fe'u}-structure.=20
Formulation with {nu} or any other cmavo of NU that does not take {ce'u} as=
=20
an argument will produce the same ambiguity.=20

sa'unai Accoding to F1, a statement

ko'a citkrfa lo du'u ko'a citka ko'e ......S2

fixes the proposition {ko'a citka ko'e}:=20
referents of {ko'a} and {ko'e} are fixed respectively.=20
Then, a statement {fi'o citkrfa ko'a citka ko'e} does not necessarily=20
signify the same proposition as {ko'a citka ko'e} in S2.=20
The former signifies a proposition that ko'a who eats ko'e is involved in a=
=20
proposition that zo'e eats ko'e.=20
An interpretation of ko'a!=3Dzo'e makes sense when a tapeworm eats things=
=20
eaten by the host, for example.

This ambiguity of interpretation comes from fixing the proposition in x2 of
{citkrfa}.

In order to make S1 always true, x2 of {citkrfa} should not be a=20
proposition but an open sentence, which leaves one place be free for use in=
=20
any other statement, and fixes referents of the other arguments to the same=
=20
as the proposition intended.=20
Then, when {fi'o citkrfa ko'a} appears in a statement, we can have a=20
consistent interpretation that {ko'a} occupies the free place of the open=
=20
sentence, and this occupation brings a proposition intended.

The reasonable English translation of definition of {brodrfV} that satisfie=
s

x1 brodrfV lo ka fV ce'u broda <=3D> broda fV x1=20

would be:

x1 brings a proposition by satisfying a formula stated in {ka}-clause.

mu'o

=20

--=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.

------=_Part_684_1420038364.1428639916214
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><br>Le vendredi 10 avril 2015 08:56:56 UTC+9, xorxes a=
 =C3=A9crit&nbsp;:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;marg=
in-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"=
ltr"><br><div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div>So "citkrfa" m=
eans something like "x1 is the eater in x2", "citkrfe" means "x1 is what ge=
ts eaten in x2", and so on. Then I think "du'u" does make sense:</div><div>=
<br></div><div>citkrfa: x1 is that which proposition x2 claims eats.</div><=
div>citkrfe: x1 is that which proposition x2 claims is eaten.</div><div><br=
></div><div>Events could also make sense:</div><div><br></div><div><div>cit=
krfa: x1 is what eats when x2 happens.</div><div>citkrfe: x1 is what is eat=
en when x2 happens.</div></div><div><br></div><div>Or a property:</div><div=
><br></div><div><div>citkrfa: x1 eats when it has property x2</div><div>cit=
krfe: x1 is eaten when it has property x2</div></div><div><br></div></div><=
/div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div>I want to avoid using {du'=
u} for the following reason.</div><div><br></div><div>a formulation like</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>&gt; citkrfa: x1 is that which proposition x2 claims=
 eats. ......F1</div><div><br></div><div>makes sense, but is not suitable f=
or the interpretation of</div><div><br></div><div>fa ko'a citka ko'e =3D=3D=
=3D fi'o citkrfa ko'a citka ko'e ......S1</div><div><br></div><div>which is=
 derived from what la_tsani stated.&nbsp;</div><div>F1 brings an ambiguity =
of interpretation that is shared with {fi'o citka be ko'e ko'a} or any BAI/=
{fi'o fe'u}-structure.&nbsp;</div><div>Formulation with {nu} or any other c=
mavo of NU that does not take {ce'u} as an argument will produce the same a=
mbiguity.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>sa'unai Accoding to F1, a statemen=
t</div><div><br></div><div>ko'a citkrfa lo du'u ko'a citka ko'e ......S2</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>fixes the proposition {ko'a citka ko'e}:&nbsp;</div>=
<div>referents of {ko'a} and {ko'e} are fixed respectively.&nbsp;</div><div=
>Then, a statement {fi'o citkrfa ko'a citka ko'e} does not necessarily sign=
ify the same proposition as {ko'a citka ko'e} in S2.&nbsp;</div><div>The fo=
rmer signifies a proposition that ko'a who eats ko'e is involved in a propo=
sition that zo'e eats ko'e.&nbsp;</div><div>An interpretation of ko'a!=3Dzo=
'e makes sense when a tapeworm eats things eaten by the host, for example.<=
/div><div><br></div><div>This ambiguity of interpretation comes from fixing=
 the proposition in x2 of</div><div>{citkrfa}.</div><div><br></div><div>In =
order to make S1 always true, x2 of {citkrfa} should not be a proposition b=
ut an open sentence, which leaves one place be free for use in any other st=
atement, and fixes referents of the other arguments to the same as the prop=
osition intended.&nbsp;</div><div>Then, when {fi'o citkrfa ko'a} appears in=
 a statement, we can have a consistent interpretation that {ko'a} occupies =
the free place of the open sentence, and this occupation brings a propositi=
on intended.</div><div><br></div><div><div>The reasonable English translati=
on of definition of {brodrfV} that satisfies</div><div><br></div><div>x1 br=
odrfV lo ka fV ce'u broda &lt;=3D&gt; broda fV x1&nbsp;</div><div><br></div=
><div>would be:</div><div><br></div><div>x1 brings a proposition by satisfy=
ing a formula stated in {ka}-clause.</div><div><br></div></div><div>mu'o</d=
iv><div><br></div></div><div>&nbsp;</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 />

------=_Part_684_1420038364.1428639916214--
------=_Part_683_530982007.1428639916214--