Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]:35757) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1R7BqC-0008Nd-6N; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:30 -0700 Received: by yxj17 with SMTP id 17sf4661173yxj.16 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-yahoo-newman-property:x-yahoo-newman-id :x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references:message-id:date:from:subject:to :in-reply-to:mime-version:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=z/iwYhTnwf9imDJ+Pb5egRq8ntTT+CQze9Lm80Scxn8=; b=38zZ85CJ3qYjHg7s7xmbAJ5I/XzyC6Vn1bpepTwgid+IvkL2i+zxUgDHRMY2bKOhgv W6OzsNHt1QiKaIYLaclPC7xWso/iWLTkD163YKqEVnFPPMWiCdjn2Pt7PJzxTGYWjIMn Lh88631Ekrfyd4gp+EG/YwiD2cwyhfgv7vggE= Received: by 10.150.116.21 with SMTP id o21mr847428ybc.71.1316807712378; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:12 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.87.13 with SMTP id p13ls2272146anl.4.gmail; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.24.40 with SMTP id 40mr558244anx.7.1316807711421; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.24.40 with SMTP id 40mr558243anx.7.1316807711399; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm22-vm1.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm22-vm1.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com. [66.94.236.140]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id v10si12238495anq.2.2011.09.23.12.55.11; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.140 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.236.140; Received: from [66.94.237.192] by nm22.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Sep 2011 19:55:11 -0000 Received: from [66.94.237.120] by tm3.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Sep 2011 19:55:11 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1025.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Sep 2011 19:55:11 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-5 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 109888.68229.bm@omp1025.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 78178 invoked by uid 60001); 23 Sep 2011 19:55:11 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: q_qaJsEVM1lbI5Sj5XqPu3Anybjb33Y9JxhQDXXfrJjTQ6F b_xhrkRehu_iyuioee3ZGyRIU8Py_7voWt1QPL_jsCsKfNsk71VkKv68Vcg1 CEAbK4dsIkXWDlHWxV1UCKLVjGGnQ0bWK6woTjyktFbYETvdS8N7gBJ6qEXZ FtoMa2mbNTZdXbt.U8PjQPubetWC2XFcbsiqw_gZwRJS4o6z9KKxwwLKHftF TiyWAb8Mb0mTYiKbdZMeFfrfCvji2zQI5YEnHug7U8S5SSmFakiUPs1M1ABp ifpgbrEzbXBtavdGjHaj9sM44fB4DQYzlk.hhGf8k_FADLewbECwlp9pXfRa v2GE5DTC1WxAHUzNOxMoZrNpcPEN7LFd4SrOnSmTkmg0yxCNNMbKb7.Ihykw fBTWVU4yGqLc8rJrOq4E6vD_Sgr.TsCcLRBkKCIdtQe3UNXnUJKimaXhww76 Dm1pq4F9BDWRP Received: from [99.92.108.41] by web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:10 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/574 YahooMailWebService/0.8.114.317681 References: <20110920034640.GK4310@gonzales> <20110921011503.GS4310@gonzales> <20110922035512.GA23348@gonzales> <20110923004537.GC24443@gonzales> <20110923160953.GB18894@gonzales> <45B075D3-0863-4B8F-AF43-F53F37CA4B08@yahoo.com> <20110923185710.GC18894@gonzales> Message-ID: <1316807710.77980.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:55:10 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: <20110923185710.GC18894@gonzales> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.140 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / {pi PA lo brodacu brode} doesn't seem to me to be an abuse; it merely signifies that a subbunch the size of .PA of lo broda brodes. It's a bit ickier with a proper name or a clear atomic individual (well. not so atomic anymore) but not really improper or even difficult to understand. I still don't see what the {su'o} adds -- unless you always write the decimal place 0. Ah! thew {su'o} allowa that there might be more than one such fragment, but so does just {pi za'u}, as far as I can see. So, I suppose that {za'u} is a particular quantifier of a sort -- the sort that says how big the new bunch is. Would {su'o pa} take members one at a time, where, as a plural quantifier, {su'o} might take larger sub bunches? Well, "worlds" is a slippery term (and the obvious replacement "situation" is no better). And its referent tends to get mixed up with domains or universes of discourse, which bunches of things we drawn from wherever we will to talk about. I suspect that situations and maybe even worlds could be defined to more or less match up with universes (or conversely), but I wonder if it would be worth the effort. In a discussion, we have a universe (a bunch of things and an interpretation of terms and predicates, just like a world) except that the things may not be all from one world and the interpretation of the predicates may take into account interpretations from several worlds, as needed. There are many variations but this is the core. So, presumably (though not obviously) you are in this world and the glass in some other and the the eating is evaluated in a universe where both occur. Alternately, of course, both you and the glass are in a single other world where the eating takes place. But then it is a little hard to see what that all has to do with you here and now, since that glasseater is neither. This is not detailed, but the details take too long for me to work out precisely again to participate in this discussion. It is worth noticing that the universe of a particu;ar discussion is dynamic: it expands and sometimes contracts as the discussion proceeds. Ahah! something that make matters clearer is to note that universes have worlds within them, on which they draw. (Incidentally, calling {su'o} and existential quantifier is somewhat misleading because not everything in the universe -- the range of the quantification -- exists, generally speaking). ----- Original Message ---- From: Martin Bays To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, September 23, 2011 1:57:10 PM Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable * Friday, 2011-09-23 at 13:14 -0400 - John E. Clifford : > I'm not sure what {pi za'u} might mean. I suppose the default is > either 0 or 1, so not that different from {pisu'o} after all. What > did you mean to say? > {pi su'o lo broda} is an u specified subbunch but, if a quantifier, > it, like {pi ro lo}, is over the domain of only lo broda. Oh! Just > saw the point of {za'u}, assuming that it's default is 0. But then > I don't understand {su'o pi za'u} as adding anything. The {su'o} before the {pi} was just to explicitly make it an existential quantifier... of course it's a horrible abuse of {pi}, which is meant to be a decimal point, but not a new abuse. So {su'o pi za'u ko'a}, which might or might not be the same as just {pi za'u}, would mean "one or more subbunches of ko'a", where a subbunch of ko'a is a sum aka plurality aka bunch (I understand these all to mean the same things, and to agree with Chierchia's setup, at least modulo the intensionality issues below) the atoms below which are also below ko'a; i.e. it is any ko'e such that ko'e me ko'a, if {me} is our Among relation. In other words, {su'o pi za'u ko'a} would be the plural quantifier \exists X AMONG ko'a > Yes, bunches can include things from various worlds because domains > often contain such: we talk about imaginary things and past things and > so on, all not from this world but some other. This world only has > what exists in this world in it. There is a much longer way of laying > this out, but that is the gist. We need this to make general claims > (along with other reasons), since we often want to generalize not just > about the current whatevers but about past and future ones as well. Naturally. But the way I'm understanding the tense system, {lo} and {zo'e} would only ever get evaluated *after* we've selected a world. e.g. {mi ka'e citka lo blaci} means that in some possible world I eat something which is glass *in that possible world*, i.e. it means something like (ignoring all subtleties of {lo} for a moment) \exists w. \exists b. (blaci_w(b) /\ citka_w(mi,b)) (where the first quantifier is over worlds, and the second quantifier is over the domain, and blaci_w and citka_w are the interepretations of blaci in the world w, being relations on the domain). I really don't see how it could work any other way. Could you explain in detail how you see it doing so? Martin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.