From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Mar 15 10:44:27 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:44:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HRtzq-0007eh-Go for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:44:21 -0700 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HRtzW-0007eV-M8 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:44:09 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:43:54 -0700 To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: spofu pemci Message-ID: <20070315174354.GM20104@digitalkingdom.org> References: <925d17560703150812g5dbf5055k2a4b6a42112c1283@mail.gmail.com> <1189A858F8918F43BE3F9C7603C73FB4031E7C1F@0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com> <925d17560703151007v1f9cf43el82595dcfd93d1f36@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <925d17560703151007v1f9cf43el82595dcfd93d1f36@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 4144 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 02:07:29PM -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote: > On 3/15/07, Turniansky, Michael > wrote: > > > > "LE broda cu brode GI'A brodi vau LE brodo" => "LE broda > >cu brode LE brodo .i JA LE broda cu brodi LE brood" (do I have > >THAT right, at least??) > > I would say yes, but I'm almost sure I could find people who > disagree. I agree, although I expect to disagree with you about tanru JA (see another post). > Let's consider a concrete example: > > 1a) lo cinfo cu nakni gi'e femti > 1b) Lions are male and female. > > 2a) lo cinfo cu nakni .ije lo cinfo cu femti > 2b) Lions are male and lions are female. > > For me, (1a) and (2a) say the same thing (and the English (1b) and > (2b) also say that same thing). What they say is relatively vague, > at least if compared with the more precise quantified forms: Only under xorlo, which, your regular un-labelled usage aside, still isn't formally part of the language. > 3a) ro cinfo cu nakni gi'e femti > 3b) All lions are male and female. > > 4a) ro cinfo cu nakni .ije ro cinfo cu femti > 4b) All lions are male and all lions are female. > > 5a) su'o cinfo cu nakni gi'e femti > 5b) Some lions are male and female. > > 6a) su'o cinfo cu nakni .ije su'o cinfo cu femti > 6b) Some lions are male and some lions are female. > > Notice that (3) and (4) happen to mean the same thing (because the > quantifier {ro} and the connective {gi'e} can change their > relative scope without changing meaning), but (5) and (6) mean > very different things (because {ro} and {gi'a} cannot change their > relative scope without a change of meaning). You mean {gi'e}. Huh. I thought that the *definition* of {gi'e} is that it is meaning-equivalent to the {.i je} version. This turns out to not exactly be the case; the CLL says that all connectives (except certain tanru-internal cases) can be transformed into *some* {.i JA} case, but not how to do it. Interesting. I assert, in apparent agreement with you, that {su'o cinfo cu nakni gi'e femti} == {su'o da poi cinfu zo'u da nakni .i je da femti}, and that that is false, and different from 6. > (3)=(4), and (5) are clearly false. (6) is clearly true. > > (1) and (2) are more vague, but I would say they are true. If > someone says (1) or (2) you may want to ask for more precision, > just in case. Some people think that Lojban cannot tolerate this > kind of vagueness, so they will either not agree with me that (1a) > and (1b) mean the same thing, or they will not agree that they can > be true. Under xorlo, I agree. As usual, I'm uspet that you've used xorlo (on the beginner's list, no less!) without tagging it as such. Please be more careful. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!" Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/