Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:57632)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhCs3PL0BBoEL2W-TQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RFvoT-00082V-G2; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:37:49 -0700
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf3647338pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:37:35 -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=BNsDCTzQNmuV5ZiQZFkNXEhGtycZujSkoRrFoCz7A6A=;
        b=vDmz7XvmCBFjcMpTUccxcA3BjhSF+I2AVY96UJfqVRBpL6VoO4qjdLMKdcQ1n1UNZG
         wfjPlQf9ypkqUdCVZmTPn03cZsBS0AKws8qgOG1P0t/qsYXywLpyvi8rFtiCpSbY5bhK
         X17qxcBwU4rT+1iYU7szIZYn3whgRsSg7k5DU=
Received: by 10.68.7.197 with SMTP id l5mr29297pba.14.1318891052651;
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.33.200 with SMTP id t8ls210487pbi.4.gmail; Mon, 17 Oct 2011
 15:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.21.229 with SMTP id y5mr166829pbe.1.1318891051977;
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:37:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.21.229 with SMTP id y5mr166828pbe.1.1318891051962;
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:37:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l3si233862pbd.0.2011.10.17.15.37.31
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:37:31 -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 (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p9HMbV69024926
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:37:31 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1RFvoI-0004ey-L3
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 18:37:30 -0400
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 18:37:30 -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: <20111017223730.GM21114@gonzales>
References: <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>
 <8CB4A2D2-AE32-485D-94B3-FAFB81357826@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AQYPrgrEUc/1pSX1"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8CB4A2D2-AE32-485D-94B3-FAFB81357826@yahoo.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc
X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: linsi
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: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /


--AQYPrgrEUc/1pSX1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Monday, 2011-10-17 at 15:25 -0400 - John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.co=
m>:

> No particular predicates involved, though disjunctive is more likely
> with some than others.  That is, there is a mode (for a nonce word)
> that is upward distributive in any case.  Remember, with the right
> set-up {lo re gerku cu citka lo ci nanmu'} only requires one bite.

(I assume you mean {batci}, unless you're referring to the Land of
Giants set-up)

Agreed. This is something I am happy leaving up to the lexicon.

> {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 that 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.

Maybe it isn't a very good translation of the english. But I don't see
why {mi nelci lo cinfo} with the kind (in xorxes' sense) 'lions' as the
referent of {lo cinfo} shoud be any different.

> Actually, I have no problem with interpreting some occurrences of {lo}
> as kinds (as understand that notion).  But, the nice thing about
> slipping into intensional contexts is that words now stand for their
> intensions, not their extensions.  But, even if they did refer to
> their extensions, they would still be extensions in some idealized
> range of worlds.

Maybe I finally understand what you mean with your "kinds =3D maximal
bunches" idea. Let's see.

I've been implicitly assuming that in {lo broda}, the tense inside the
description is by default copied from outside it. So {mi ca ca'a nelci
lo pavyseljirna} =3D=3D {mi ca ca'a nelci lo ca ca'a pavyseljirna}, which is
false if there are no unicorns.

Now I'm guessing that you want to exploit the fact that no tense is
actually specified in {lo pavyseljirna}, and hence it could very well be
{lo pavyseljirna be ca da bei ca'a de} - "things which are unicorns at
some time in some possible world". Liking that plurality, even if it be
in a situation in which none of its constituents zasti, could indeed
mean something. It could plausibly even mean whatever it is that it
means to "like unicorns".

Is this what you've been getting at? If so, sorry that I've been too
dense to see it before.

I'm not sure what to make of it as a solution to kinds issues... let me
ponder.

> Of course, we can do without the {tu'a}, but it is
> less plausible, even with lion, let alone unicorns.  How would an
> abstraction involving lionness be closer to liking lions than one
> involving lions?

Because the abstraction in question could be {lo nu citka lo ckaji be lo
ka cinfo ku ku joi lo xamgu ke xunre vanju}...

Martin

> Sent from my iPad
>=20
> On Oct 17, 2011, at 13:32, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>=20
> > * Monday, 2011-10-17 at 09:08 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo=
=2Ecom>:
> >=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 (alth=
ough, in=20
> >> Lojban, if I say that in a natural way, I seem to guarantee that there=
 are some,=20
> >> albeit nonexistent), so maybe you are right and this is about properti=
es.  I=20
> >> would be inclined, however, to think it was rather a more general inte=
nsional=20
> >> notion, which might amount to a property, but maybe also an event, dep=
ending 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 p=
lural=20
> >> variable
> >>=20
> >> * Monday, 2011-10-17 at 07:30 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yaho=
o.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 =
plural=20
> >>> variable
> >>>=20
> >>> * Sunday, 2011-10-16 at 20:09 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yah=
oo.com>:
> >>>=20
> >>>> Ahah! "I ate disjunctively of something you like generally" or some =
such.
> >>>=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=
 plural=20
> >>>> variable
> >>>>=20
> >>>> * Sunday, 2011-10-16 at 20:49 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@g=
mail.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 =
the
> >>>>> exact same logical structure.
> >>=20
> >> --=20
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro=
ups "lojban" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googl=
egroups.com.
> >> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/l=
ojban?hl=3Den.
> >>=20
>=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@googlegr=
oups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb=
an?hl=3Den.
>=20

--AQYPrgrEUc/1pSX1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

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

iEYEARECAAYFAk6crioACgkQULC7OLX7LNawkgCghgUtv4jHekV1sNIozay4hf8Q
uhsAnRdV5YvsOhUM7WMeigoil61lbu03
=2taE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--AQYPrgrEUc/1pSX1--