Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]:37343)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRComOf0BBoEsZxxsQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RF8fB-0002HS-TS; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:55 -0700
Received: by wyh11 with SMTP id 11sf7060968wyh.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=08NFSIRPDD44kQHNNbYMF0M+yP9DeF9njEM/zd6Q6DY=;
        b=KyXbLjHoLGJGKQtzjw1/VVdn/Z/9EhNuj8FyhsFw55raBAJAaVhREp1fEbB040yhra
         G6N+3GPjU0aKN3cZDGKbw9Ckp6uzPxRB6sbKo3H/t4h3ofhyKwUn0mA4G8DwZyWpyVm8
         D1NupXpwcP/UiaAWEbv39Ax3rHayYm9bFEo5E=
Received: by 10.216.213.219 with SMTP id a69mr532758wep.24.1318702120463;
        Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.14.125.193 with SMTP id z41ls937568eeh.1.gmail; Sat, 15 Oct
 2011 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.14.7.212 with SMTP id 60mr366591eep.14.1318702119574;
        Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.14.7.212 with SMTP id 60mr366590eep.14.1318702119561;
        Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ey0-f170.google.com (mail-ey0-f170.google.com [209.85.215.170])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4si3268502eew.1.2011.10.15.11.08.39
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.170;
Received: by mail-ey0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 7so3952191eyg.1
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.77.71 with SMTP id f7mr12357339fak.33.1318702119327; Sat,
 15 Oct 2011 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.39.35 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20111015155009.GA5916@gonzales>
References: <1318202744.44997.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<20111013043308.GD3367@gonzales>
	<4E981179.1030805@gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2fe4f+VVy3DkRV9Xa+K2ZyST-ncTC3_7XdcXgfFxyG49w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111015155009.GA5916@gonzales>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 15:08:39 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2eT3xjSf7-aBuWGeMj2ck+pGAU8ooXk+xa4eUiVypBW4g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.170 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> * Saturday, 2011-10-15 at 12:16 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmai=
l.com>:
>
>> >> {ro te cange poi ponse lo xasli cu darxi ri}
>
>> I would say the Lojban is meaningful and (roughly) equivalent to
>> "every farmer who is a donkey-owner is a donkey-beater".
>
> i.e. equivalent to {ro te cange poi ponse lo xasli cu darxi lo xasli}?

Not exactly, because we have no guarantee that the first "lo xasli"
and the second "lo xasli" will always have the same referent. For
example, I could indicate with my eyes that I mean "lo [vi] xasli" the
first time and "lo [va] xasli" the second time. But if nothing strange
like that is going  on, then yes, they would be almost equivalent. The
same would apply for example to two uses of "la djan" vs. a single use
plus an anaphora. With the anaphora you are guaranteed the same
referent, with repetition, you may only normally end up with the same
referent. "ri" repeats referents, not words.

> Would you similarly say that {mi cpacu lo plise gi'e ba bo citka ri} is
> equivalent to {mi cpacu lo plise gi'e ba bo citka lo plise}, and that
> any deduction that the same apples are involved is an informal pragmatic
> one?

With "ri" the same things have to be involved, but yes, we are not
given any direct information about which subthings may be involved.

> Generally that {zo'e noi broda ku'o ri} =3D=3D {zo'e noi broda ku'o zo'e =
noi
> broda}?

This one is even less likely, since repetition of "zo'e" will only
rarely get you the same referent.

> Such a rule applied universally would make handling anaphora much easier
> (though admittedly only by pushing more under the rug of pragmatics).
>
> It still leaves super-donkey sentences like {su'o da poi te cange cu
> ponse lo xasli noi da darxi .i ri se kecti mi}, where simply copying the
> {lo} with its relative clause to the second sentence would give an
> unbound {da}. Assigning no meaning to such expressions seems reasonable.

"ri" does not copy words, so I don't see any major problem with that
sentence, at least if you leave it with "noi". With "poi" it would get
trickier.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--=20
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/lojban=
?hl=3Den.