Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:61894) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RG2Tb-0002Ei-DQ; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:44:42 -0700 Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf355733pzk.16 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:44:29 -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=7bZhjs7BBQXDh+uPvQRrZE+tOK/Y//7YjVl3fVItNBU=; b=ZXuP1vBvEjaDmXbb79GdRDhdkQyn0KF+pPJf0F1mfS2xKVZVvbkx+BcDliuS62NQ0L /k0R4+bCbAZ0nCcIMG4KaAkYFagy9D4ZrFLKtF4dPmatwAUxseEJ03K3aI8WceRrGXum G02LMX0yH1mGWJkcq9shi2/ZpbduIGg1VzTLw= Received: by 10.68.44.233 with SMTP id h9mr270300pbm.2.1318916666794; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:44:26 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.29.130 with SMTP id k2ls1201430pbh.1.gmail; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.25.168 with SMTP id d8mr1382159pbg.4.1318916665956; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.25.168 with SMTP id d8mr1382156pbg.4.1318916665939; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id lf12si1377354pbb.2.2011.10.17.22.44.25 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:44:25 -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 p9I5iPqr025171 for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 05:44:25 GMT Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from ) id 1RG2TR-0002mx-2v for lojban@googlegroups.com; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:44:25 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:44:25 -0400 From: Martin Bays To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable Message-ID: <20111018054425.GP21114@gonzales> References: <1318906003.98760.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20111018044730.GB30548@gonzales> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ftQmbtOmUf2cr8rB" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111018044730.GB30548@gonzales> 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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --ftQmbtOmUf2cr8rB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Tuesday, 2011-10-18 at 00:47 -0400 - Martin Bays : > * Monday, 2011-10-17 at 19:46 -0700 - John E Clifford : > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Martin Bays > > > Maybe I finally understand what you mean with your "kinds =3D maximal > > > bunches" idea. Let's see. > > >=20 > > > 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}, w= hich is > > > false if there are no unicorns. > >=20 > > I suppose the tense (if there is one) is as contextual as everything el= se about=20 > > descriptions. The same as the bridi surely is a good guess in general,= but may=20 > > be obviously wrong in other circumstances. For example, in generalitie= s, the=20 > > tense (if that is the right notion) is probably past, present, future a= nd=20 > > possible. >=20 > Right, so I think I do understand you. >=20 > Does this work? But there's something of a problem: if the plural referent of {lo broda} is meant to satisfy broda, what tense can give us e.g. all dodos ever? The plural referent of {lo pu cipnrdodo} must satisfy {pu cipnrdodo}, i.e. must have satisfied {cipnrdodo} at some point in the past. But that means we're picking up some dodos all of which existed at the same time. So it seems we'd have to have the rule be that {ro lo broda cu broda}, rather than {lo broda cu broda}, for this to work. Unless there's some excuse for tenses being magic here? Martin --ftQmbtOmUf2cr8rB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk6dEjgACgkQULC7OLX7LNZg3gCgsqgjhw2kIKD10bkYaByax8JA 2sgAnjD5NrhoAGLvQBq7H3CCRK40hf4J =FyCc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ftQmbtOmUf2cr8rB--