Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]:34482)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCNuStaWoDxCyge70BBoEYIlUPw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RFbjg-00062e-FX; Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:31 -0700
Received: by wyg24 with SMTP id 24sf11761wyg.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:date:from:user-agent
         :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-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=4hHNWtiv+5j/KXXuUHd0/j2JdfrwCSE+ddSnAkjyQFk=;
        b=6Y4NneBXJvdBitBiJ4uJiSMpRRig6G+wG39CKwJxzFitZIr88T6FD3B9sQx/2R0enh
         uzeqFOOQ1QR6wgViwryFAby6WqlZzwHN8kQ013envNSXzZgDKjc4zgpWNnbrYH34cGkO
         e0GPKTch6g0OchQxe8CPoq4jmyH85ChJK5muE=
Received: by 10.216.138.27 with SMTP id z27mr972816wei.13.1318813874364;
        Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.216.206.224 with SMTP id l74ls20891428weo.2.gmail; Sun, 16 Oct
 2011 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.203.143 with SMTP id f15mr100510weo.1.1318813873531;
        Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.203.143 with SMTP id f15mr100509weo.1.1318813873514;
        Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f47.google.com (mail-ww0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fd1si1290560wbb.0.2011.10.16.18.11.13
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.47;
Received: by mail-ww0-f47.google.com with SMTP id 7so2511211wwg.28
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.199.16 with SMTP id eq16mr6035406wbb.48.1318813873208;
        Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.69] (87-194-76-177.bethere.co.uk. [87.194.76.177])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n21sm28204167wbp.2.2011.10.16.18.11.11
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E9B80AF.30901@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 02:11:11 +0100
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.22) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/3.1.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
References: <1318202744.44997.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<20111013043308.GD3367@gonzales>	<4E981179.1030805@gmail.com>	<CAO7tK2fe4f+VVy3DkRV9Xa+K2ZyST-ncTC3_7XdcXgfFxyG49w@mail.gmail.com>	<4E9A3F33.5050609@gmail.com> <CAO7tK2c8+gcN7aQTFzmB_hi9X5k5eboWtvo7GPop3F7uA_VDUg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2c8+gcN7aQTFzmB_hi9X5k5eboWtvo7GPop3F7uA_VDUg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.47 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=and.rosta@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; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

Jorge Llamb=EDas, On 17/10/2011 01:31:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 11:19 PM, And Rosta<and.rosta@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>> The commonest case where covert donkey sentences occur is with condition=
als:
>> "If you give me money, I'll spend it on drugs" =3D "Every possible
>> circumstance in which there is money that you give me is a circumstance =
in
>> which there is money that you give me and I spend on drugs". I don't thi=
nk
>> your solution works for that. Applying your solution gives (I think) "Ev=
ery
>> circumstance is such that in it I spend all money that you give me", whi=
ch
>> has the wrong meaning. Crucially, the conditionals rely on restricted
>> quantification (over circumstances in which such and such is the case).
>
> Why does it have the wrong meaning? Is it still wrong if you use "any"
> instead of "all"?

In apprehending underlying forms, we need to get rid of "any", since it is =
an English reflection of a quantifier interacting with a conditional.

But let's change "money" to "five quid": "Every circumstance is such that i=
n it I spend five quid that you give me". Wrong, obviously.  Or try "If you=
 tell me your name, I'll murmur it".

>I think my solution would give: "For any money, if
> you give it to me, I'll spend it on drugs" or "I'll spend on drugs any
> money you give me".

Underlying "if" and conditionals is a logical form that is either repretiti=
ous, "Every possible circumstance in which there is money that you give me =
is a circumstance in which there is money that you give me and I spend on d=
rugs", or else a donkey sentence, "Every possible circumstance in which the=
re is money that you give me is a circumstance in which I spend it on drugs=
". So your challenge is to reformulate that, without using "if" or "any", b=
ut without the repetition (of "there is money that you give me").

>> So well done with the reformulation of the classic donkey sentence, but =
now
>> turn your ingenuity to "Every possible circumstance in which there is mo=
ney
>> that you give me is a circumstance in which there is money that you give=
 me
>> and I spend on drugs".
>
> I think the issue with donkey sentences is not so much reformulating
> them in terms of ordinary first order logic, which can be done by
> replacing the short scope existential by a wide scope universal. The
> problematic issue is explaining what's going on, since this conversion
> is not licensed by any rules of logic.

I see what you're saying, but I think we have different understandings of t=
he quintessence of donkey-sentencehood. I take it to be when you have quant=
ification within a restriction on a variable, in "for every X such that the=
re is a Y such that F(X,Y), there is a Y such that F(X,Y) and G(X,Y)", whic=
h might be Englished as the less repetitious donkey-sentence "for every X s=
uch that there is a Y such that F(X,Y), G(X,Y)".

I see that as the quintessence of donkey-sentencehood not because that is h=
ow it is standardly seen in linguistics, but rather because that is the mai=
n problem they present for a logical language.

--And.

--=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.