Well, I am not sure just what the all the complications t= hat MB and xorxes have stirred up are, but, so far as I can follow it, the = position seems to be that {zo'e} stands for something I have in mind (or wo= uld have, if I thought about it). It is a constant (a different one a= t each occurrence -- an ongoing problem in Lojban), not a variable and not = under any quantifier. Then {lo broda} is that with the additional inf= ormation that the something is in some way, broda. So, it can refer t= o anything from a single broda to all brodas, past, present, future, and po= ssible but not actualized. This referent can then be said to have a f= urther property in a variety of ways, mainly to be grokked from context, si= nce the ways to specify them are not ywr well-established. My understanding is that MB disagrees with this specification of {zo'e} and x= orxes with the extrapolation to the referent, but juast why is hard to see.=

From: Michael Turniansky = <mturniansky@gmail.com>
To:<= /span> lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, October 6, 2011 12:14:28 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope exi= stentially quantified plural variable

Nope. Can't understand it well enough to= formulate a question. I'll let you and Martin and Jorge sort it out,= and then let Jorge explain it language I can understand (whether or not I = will agree with it). As physicist Ernest Rut= herford once said: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is proba= bly no damn good." Consider me your bartender.

&nb= sp; --gejyspa

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:04 PM, John E Clifford= <kali9putra@y= ahoo.com> wrote:

No, just bad typing. I am sure that is not your only qu= estion about this discussion; I sure have many.

From: Michael Turniansky &l= t;mturniansky@gmail.com>To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, October 6, 2011 = 8:24:59 AM=20

Subject:<= /b> Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural vari= able

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:23 PM, John E. Cliffo= rd <kali9putra= @yahoo.com> wrote:

[1] Sincei have doubts about what {z= o'e} means, I'm not sure what {mii na klama zo'e} means, but I suppose it m= ust be either "I do not go there", where "there" is some place obvious from= context (the value of the Skolem function for the argument mi) or "I don't= go anywhere", if it's a particular quantified variable, certainly not you = second choice.

With my usual habit of injecting mibzdi nu xajmi into long abst= ruse threads, I will just ask the following question about your first sente= nce: zo sincei zo'u se mupli fu'e xu la lyrens.oLIvieis .a la'acu'i k= e la melPOmenis .a la talaiys fu'o

&nbs= p; --gejyspa

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to t= he 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@googlegro= ups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://g= roups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the G= oogle Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegro= ups.com.
For more options, visit this group at htt= p://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
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@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.