Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:35244)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhCkjoX0BBoEA1r_-g@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1R8Ogp-0004YP-H9; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:50:48 -0700
Received: by pzk32 with SMTP id 32sf6034385pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references
         :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:x-pgp-key
         :x-pgp-keyid:x-cunselcu'a-valsi:user-agent: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;
        bh=vQs4SP+EDYSO4lvfkaZvO+V4Xedlo+T067JCCq+VLHg=;
        b=LVKOJL7ddF0y/t1KD8+N3wEIvv9A6FajWvZ91OSJ4cyClDnKJHHNqi7J6vcrTp0xhC
         SxB2Pz02/qS5tqyN//fXbIMR8CQCmEqmmEAzzUKc0wgG9ecTOdHCVBlG2RhkH6R/bRac
         g0Q8kVYKHSctzcSM2R2rKAjH8jzIrpPZVSp4Y=
Received: by 10.68.14.193 with SMTP id r1mr3261050pbc.17.1317095204200;
        Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.19.131 with SMTP id f3ls315425pbe.5.gmail; Mon, 26 Sep 2011
 20:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.46.193 with SMTP id x1mr8146920pbm.7.1317095203489;
        Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.46.193 with SMTP id x1mr8146919pbm.7.1317095203476;
        Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p6si28880445pbc.0.2011.09.26.20.46.43
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of mbays@sdf.org designates 192.94.73.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=192.94.73.19;
Received: from gonzales.homelinux.org (root@sverige.freeshell.org [192.94.73.4])
	by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p8R3kgjg015165
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 03:46:43 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1R8Od0-00012h-GR
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 23:46:42 -0400
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 23:46:42 -0400
From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
Message-ID: <20110927034642.GM22625@gonzales>
References: <20110921000757.GR4310@gonzales>
 <1316618218.15694.YahooMailRC@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20110922234555.GB24443@gonzales>
 <1316736086.52889.YahooMailRC@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20110924150246.GA4576@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2dNOSWyXBDzq3KSSqMsUx8f81vNtKugSCV0z_-VNCQFVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110925153046.GB4576@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2cQNh5p2FhTJnniK_Pb_KOMYrDvvpCSPrk97yTomAXq5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110927012751.GK22625@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2dOPDoyuL5n3_biXZywVeZtyLZvHwpUXTAXtmqqOyL3XA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5fECsWged6836Ycf"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2dOPDoyuL5n3_biXZywVeZtyLZvHwpUXTAXtmqqOyL3XA@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc
X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: mukti
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Original-Sender: mbays@sdf.org
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 best guess record for domain of mbays@sdf.org designates 192.94.73.19 as
 permitted sender) smtp.mail=mbays@sdf.org
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /


--5fECsWged6836Ycf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Monday, 2011-09-26 at 23:54 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.co=
m>:

> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> >
> > But forgetting about the formalism for a second, surely you'd agree that
> > "lions are in my garden" is logically equivalent to "one or more lions
> > are in my garden" in every reasonable sense? In particular, that you can
> > deduce each from the other?
> >
> > It's part of the basic underlying theory of english semantics, if you
> > like.
>=20
> I think in English a plain "lions are in my garden" may require two or
> more lion manifestations, no?

True!

But I think you see what I was getting at anyway.

> But on the other hand something like "I stay away from home whenever
> lions are in my garden" probably includes single-lion occasions too.
> In Lojban that issue would not arise anyway.
>=20
> > If we have models where this equivalence fails, like the one you mention
> > which has Lion but no lion instances, then our models are failing to
> > model this basic underlying theory.
> >
> > It's in that sense that I'd consider them deficient.
>=20
> Of course, whenever you need to consider lion manifestations, you need
> a domain of discourse with lion manifestations, there's no way around
> that. So if your starting point is that lion manifestations are
> needed, any model without them won't cover it.

I'll take that as being as close to agreement as we're going to get, and
as close enough for present purposes.

> > So in response to your original remark
> >
> >> >> (But at the same time you have no objection to domains that include
> >> >> an individual but not its stages, although there are analogous
> >> >> types of predications about individuals that can be resolved as
> >> >> existential quantification over stages.
> >
> > : yes, were we to have a setup like the one you sketch above, then
> > just as with kinds, a model in which "John sat there" is true had better
> > have an actual John-stage which actually sits there.
> >
> > The only reason that I wasn't raising this objection was because
> > I wasn't assuming a setup with stages.
>=20
> Exactly. You don't need to assume a setup with stages (and I fully
> agree), but apparently you do feel that a setup with manifestations is
> always necessary (while I don't).

Here I'm not sure I see the analogy. Instead of stages, we can have
individuals and predications about them at certain times. Is the analogy
then meant to be:

stages <-~-> manifestations
individuals <-~-> kinds
time <-~-> space-time

? If so, I don't think that really works - it's actual lions which
satisfy predicates at specific points of space-time, not Lion.

> > Unless you really think it's necessary, I'd prefer to avoid getting into
> > the details of handling space and time for now. But briefly: I'm
> > currently thinking we should handle neither with the stage approach, and
> > rather both with the worlds approach (so a "world" would actually be
> > a co-ordinate (possible world, time, space)). An argument for another
> > day, perhaps!
>=20
> In lots of cases we don't need to get anywhere near space and time. If
> we want to say something like "travel is good for the soul", any
> connection with space-time is remote and of little relevance. We can
> just say "lo nu litru cu xamgu lo pruxi" and not concern ourselves
> with travel manifestations or soul manifestations.

We can, in much the same way that we can say "birds typically have
wings" without having to think about any actual birds; but I'd say both
statements are actually about manifestations.

But I'm not sure that this is at all important.

--5fECsWged6836Ycf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk6BRyIACgkQULC7OLX7LNZBWgCfVjWK6O2bZpZag/wsjOyrR5Tz
6CkAoJLA9hiuSep3p3RFL/22ixjVOUvm
=dO3G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--5fECsWged6836Ycf--