Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:36567)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRDh_fH0BBoEcHwuUA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RFsfC-0006vz-L3; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:16:03 -0700
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf3444039pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:15:48 -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-id:x-yahoo-newman-property
         :x-ymail-osg:x-yahoo-smtp:references:in-reply-to
         :x-apple-yahoo-original-message-folder:mime-version:message-id
         :x-mailer:from:x-apple-yahoo-replied-msgid:subject:date: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=8jMmhELy1wGSQH01lw9wYz5q7eGBNBHBYMtXvP52xro=;
        b=JIhJX051ZkmuTkWHAbLYdBv01raM7boz1RqTFvStlQBKff5hyt25EXghny6jdaUMDJ
         GIdTgVIKD1Og9Uxt0nv83LA6P5hWH5JvZpx5zqnBWMW+RN/nb2yxAtfYSRs1Vu6DX6ue
         GfH2r7rlmu3n8n8IfG7xORea8QhE59uDPvfSw=
Received: by 10.68.55.231 with SMTP id v7mr2834441pbp.1.1318878945881;
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.121.239 with SMTP id ln15ls4008625pbb.3.gmail; Mon, 17 Oct
 2011 12:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.11.199 with SMTP id s7mr26555895pbb.5.1318878945271;
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.11.199 with SMTP id s7mr26555884pbb.5.1318878945051;
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm11.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com (nm11.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com. [98.139.91.81])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id l3si15883942pbd.0.2011.10.17.12.15.44;
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 98.139.91.81 as permitted sender) client-ip=98.139.91.81;
Received: from [98.139.91.65] by nm11.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Oct 2011 19:15:44 -0000
Received: from [98.139.91.1] by tm5.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Oct 2011 19:15:44 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1001.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Oct 2011 19:15:44 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 804872.69998.bm@omp1001.mail.sp2.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 63008 invoked from network); 17 Oct 2011 19:15:44 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG: 1InuKa4VM1lx9amh.cSjbdCcfCngV7Af8nZCfjSYNUJXJah
 rwLnIdsMKVAGI1jkfX3uu2Xsnar5C49vHHB6by3GXd4XEQh._Ys7NVv7hb_j
 dzeiiSk15XOhh5Z31bua.bC.q6aPZ3vBGpnYn9aKB5DZev1ngNmE5Ja8C35c
 eEY2b67jHttONZl5duXdgEDQqdBoSqJ4Ac.2F77EQP.edXX1DdRrBwKR7.UQ
 djSXNzWGf.mRfo8SzUe4ruedHfHbdpGYe2dZM_3KW_lVgniAEjz.2Qwjo8F.
 pH4cmikmxGsKj4lQShuJyeyXjEp5pKOnUrb8vb7B46pBHCLl6dznfl681Eaw
 qr44Y9r8V7_SBvqttGBMv2K5I4gBBy4CWuiZc4PUuGG8zlqY6O3nzzYPmxSL
 Q3pqozmbwuj76xkPTanQIaPyt._SmNjS4QODrzVPlESH6Xmd7rK6AYriVPSg
 DWzULSJuXJqkof73wk7uCTsMEzeMQHqaudwo3i1z0EjpK4c2t2b2q0sJKliB
 37Z15DjvY
X-Yahoo-SMTP: xvGyF4GswBCIFKGaxf5wSjlg3RF108g-
Received: from [192.168.1.68] (kali9putra@99.92.108.41 with xymcookie)
        by smtp119-mob.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Oct 2011 12:15:44 -0700 PDT
References: <20111015200404.GB3090@gonzales> <CAO7tK2d212cYedWPHvVjz2BsDhrfst9GOB+00QSRHGMMaOHQGg@mail.gmail.com> <20111015232957.GH3779@gonzales> <CAO7tK2fA-k46_-YAZyisTqcYGAKRXXK1W_6bHzicypBe6drraw@mail.gmail.com> <20111017015603.GF21114@gonzales> <1318820956.53263.YahooMailRC@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20111017035148.GA25291@gonzales> <1318861845.83221.YahooMailRC@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20111017144326.GK21114@gonzales> <1318867725.87796.YahooMailRC@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20111017173223.GL21114@gonzales>
In-Reply-To: <20111017173223.GL21114@gonzales>
X-Apple-Yahoo-Original-Message-Folder: AAlojbanery
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8G4)
Message-Id: <8CB4A2D2-AE32-485D-94B3-FAFB81357826@yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8G4)
From: "John E. Clifford" <kali9putra@yahoo.com>
X-Apple-Yahoo-Replied-Msgid: 1_10571120_AHfHjkQAAKgJTpxmvgMduUzgQ3A
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:25:13 -0400
To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" <lojban@googlegroups.com>
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 98.139.91.81
 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: <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: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

No particular predicates involved, though disjunctive is more likely with s=
ome than others.  That is, there is a mode (for a nonce word) that is upwar=
d distributive in any case.  Remember, with the right set-up {lo re gerku c=
u citka lo ci nanmu'} only requires one bite.
{mi nelci lo ka cinfo} doesn't get at any meaning of "I like lions" as far =
as I can see; it's about liking something else, lionness.  Now, I suppose t=
hat liking lioness might be one factor in liking lions, but surely not the =
whole of it.  I might like their feet or the way they taste roasted or ...,=
 none of which are lionness.
Actually, I have no problem with interpreting some occurrences of {lo} as k=
inds (as understand that notion).  But, the nice thing about slipping into =
intensional contexts is that words now stand for their intensions, not thei=
r extensions.  But, even if they did refer to their extensions, they would =
still be extensions in some idealized range of worlds.  Of course, we can d=
o without the {tu'a}, but it is less plausible, even with lion, let alone u=
nicorns.  How would an abstraction involving lionness be closer to liking l=
ions than one involving lions?
Sent from my iPad

On Oct 17, 2011, at 13:32, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:

> * Monday, 2011-10-17 at 09:08 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.c=
om>:
>=20
>> Once you have a plurality, you can slice and dice any which way.
>=20
> Ah, you just mean that there are predicates like {ce'u nibli ko'a},
> which is probably "upwards distributive" - true of a plurality iff of
> some subplurality? That's harmless enough.
>=20
>> Well, let's see.  I can like unicorns, even if there are not any (althou=
gh, in=20
>> Lojban, if I say that in a natural way, I seem to guarantee that there a=
re some,=20
>> albeit nonexistent), so maybe you are right and this is about properties=
.  I=20
>> would be inclined, however, to think it was rather a more general intens=
ional=20
>> notion, which might amount to a property, but maybe also an event, depen=
ding on=20
>> what one likes about them -- even a sensation.
>=20
> Yes, {mi nelci lo ka cinfo} is only getting at one of the meanings of "I
> like lions". It could also mean e.g. mi nelci lo ka nu citka lo cinfo.
>=20
>> So, I would probably write {mi nelci tu'a lo cinfo} (I am away from my
>> tables right now, so I may have the cmavo wrong, but it is around
>> there somewhere.
>=20
> {tu'a} is the right cmavo, but I don't think this works if we're
> (as I assume we are for the nonce) disallowing kind interpretations of
> {lo} - it would have to mean that I like some abstraction to do with
> some/the lions. Not much use for talking about lions in general; even
> less for talking about unicorns in general. I fear it would have to be
> {mi nelci tu'o lo ka cinfo}.
>=20
> Martin
>=20
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
>> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Mon, October 17, 2011 9:43:26 AM
>> Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plu=
ral=20
>> variable
>>=20
>> * Monday, 2011-10-17 at 07:30 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.=
com>:
>>=20
>>> But "I like lions" has nothing to do with lionness, just lions.
>>=20
>> What does it have to do with any lions? You can like lions without
>> liking (even potentially) any lions.
>>=20
>>> As for getting rid of disjunctive predication,  if you allow plural
>>> reference, you are stuck with all the consequences (you are stuck with
>>> them even if you use sets to cover up the problem in singular
>>> reference).
>>=20
>> Why would plural reference lead you to using disjunctive predication?
>>=20
>>> It seems to me ythat the problems arise when you get away from basics
>>> and try messing around with things like kinds or nesses (we have both,
>>> of course, but they come in overtly, not sub rosa).
>>>=20
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
>>> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
>>> Sent: Sun, October 16, 2011 10:51:48 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified pl=
ural=20
>>> variable
>>>=20
>>> * Sunday, 2011-10-16 at 20:09 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo=
.com>:
>>>=20
>>>> Ahah! "I ate disjunctively of something you like generally" or some su=
ch.
>>>=20
>>> Something along those lines, yes.
>>>=20
>>> The context here is that we're trying to see what happens if we throw
>>> kinds out of the window (and also disjunctive predication, in whatever
>>> sense it was there), and try to make do with normal things - including
>>> properties, which I hope can replace pure-kind predications of the "I
>>> like lions" kind (think of it as "I like lionness").=20
>>>=20
>>> Martin
>>>=20
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
>>>> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
>>>> Sent: Sun, October 16, 2011 8:56:03 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified p=
lural=20
>>>> variable
>>>>=20
>>>> * Sunday, 2011-10-16 at 20:49 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gma=
il.com>:
>>>>> (2) ca lo prulamnicte mi citka su'o da poi do nelci ke'a
>>>>> "Last night I ate something you like."
>>>>>=20
>>>>> You want to accept (1) but reject (2), even though to me they have th=
e
>>>>> exact same logical structure.
>>=20
>> --=20
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group=
s "lojban" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googleg=
roups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/loj=
ban?hl=3Den.
>>=20

--=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.