From bpfk-list+bncCJ2UzZHuDRC-nrDmBBoEXRrshw@googlegroups.com Sat Oct 30 05:27:57 2010 Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCAXK-0004bx-8u; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:57 -0700 Received: by pzk6 with SMTP id 6sf104161pzk.16 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:received:received:mime-version :received:received: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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=mfW83iLS5kSzLYA7PoPwVwD531zUGTRdGCL8t/MyiBs=; b=TT5bAD3X4v/YmHkdciHPQCRzT+ODRpkyxPZjIfmbVr7YJ5tuyq2RoG/7tk/iLo8x51 uY+Dh2ne7Tf+09LIt9eQcBO/eaWahmQcL9dax7vE+7rL6yLdPrfA2YnBbAbJoASKyydN CbnCozXglKkyWcwnYEhtaZdXaNYwH5qMoFwWo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf: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:content-transfer-encoding; b=KvK3dMILIBFefnQQcKdV/ECo4zs5hWs6PgXXLglxEbK01V1fbwHYDaIw+iZrUkFisO Kr5MGmVpL2x8f3SmZxyj3HoMzQHHToiukQG+bz7rDe4u2584GAADSy3Vs04vOY2GHl49 CVMlr8r9soHpHIX8AeXkp1xHvle0j0yPR+6n0= Received: by 10.142.149.8 with SMTP id w8mr128055wfd.45.1288441662539; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:42 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.2.41 with SMTP id 41ls2993090wfb.0.p; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.208.21 with SMTP id f21mr1861304wfg.30.1288441661572; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.208.21 with SMTP id f21mr1861303wfg.30.1288441661543; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id f13si4247961wfo.4.2010.10.30.05.27.40; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:40 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of nobody@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.234; Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCAX6-0004am-2A for bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:40 -0700 Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCAX2-0004aT-Jh for bpfk@lojban.org; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:40 -0700 Received: by wwb31 with SMTP id 31so3971683wwb.10 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.133.140 with SMTP id f12mr729931wbt.139.1288441650099; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.32.140 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 05:27:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20101030050036.GS1105@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20101030050036.GS1105@digitalkingdom.org> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:27:30 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] CLL Check: Only If From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com, bpfk@lojban.org X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of nobody@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nobody@digitalkingdom.org; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > Apologies for the HTML. =A0Here's what's in the books as far as I can > tell: > > - ------------- > >

Example 4.10, which uses the TFTT truth func= tion, is subject to the same rules: the stated gloss of TFTT > as =93only if=94 works naturally only when the right-hand bridi is true; = if it is false, the left-hand bridi may be either true or false > . The last gloss of Example 4.10 illustrates th= e use of =93if ... then=94 as a more natural substitute for =93only > =A0if=94.

> 
> 4.10) =A0la djan. nanmu .inaja la djeimyz.=
 ninmu
> =A0 =A0 =A0 John is-not-a-man or James is-a-woman.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 John is a man only if James is a woman.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 If John is a man, then James is a woman.
>
> > - ------------- > > "if it is false, the left-hand bridi may be either true or false" > is, as far as I can tell, wrong. =A0The t,f case is false here. > > Am I missing something? =A0What should this say? The intention probably was: << the stated gloss of TFTT as =93only if=94 works naturally only when the right-hand bridi is *false*; if it is *true*, the left-hand bridi may be either true or false. >> But I find the whole discussion between examples 4.8 and 4.10 somewhat confusing. The examples should not use tendentiously true ("John is a man") or false ("James is a woman") statements. They should use neutral statements, that can be either true or false, as well as being causally unrelated. Say "John's car is blue" and "James' car is red". John's car is blue only if James' car is red. tells us something about the color of John's car when we know that James' car is not red. When we know that James' car is red, that sentence doesn't tell us anything about the color of John's car. That may be what is being called "unnatural", something like "uninformative". In the English gloss we expect this sentence to be information about John's car, because "John's car" is the subject. If we know that James' car is red, that sentence, if true, is uninformative (and hence somewhat "unnatural", we don't usually go around stating empty truths). The difference with the Lojban is that "if" and "only if" are subordinators in English, while ".inaja" and ".ijanai" are proper sentence connectives. So in Lojban there is no reason to expect this statement to be information about John's car any more than it could be information about James' car. That's where the "unnaturality" comes from, I suppose. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.