Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:52553)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhCjtfz0BBoEdC04pg@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RGb8N-0002PG-Rj; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:45:08 -0700
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf2020550pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:44:53 -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=sqEiYWOcwKYB2Hxqol3esEqvSICgVMDQwkADWQCyjzM=;
        b=R2oLC526zIYqbkxCEL4Oi4jWSjZErGJ4SQPeJ0R64jFzsIhhjt5Sve8aYNlWrVcKYD
         lmnhd7ps7IiYc9B+SIlswwUJdcGf/sNgRNFR6rXl4xREVt1xYd4JpRjTFYwTr4DluAg/
         n5TTrj0rAf+6UTPs0jYAve7rOFT5F3flYcD5g=
Received: by 10.68.44.233 with SMTP id h9mr1504133pbm.2.1319049891428;
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:44:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.121.239 with SMTP id ln15ls6853246pbb.3.gmail; Wed, 19 Oct
 2011 11:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.22.230 with SMTP id h6mr4525284pbf.4.1319049890500;
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.22.230 with SMTP id h6mr4525280pbf.4.1319049890466;
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id lf12si3503417pbb.2.2011.10.19.11.44.50
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:44:50 -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 p9JIinLK013709
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:44:50 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1RGb8D-0007Hi-6d
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 14:44:49 -0400
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 14:44:49 -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: <20111019184449.GC5010@gonzales>
References: <1318906003.98760.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20111018044730.GB30548@gonzales>
 <20111018054425.GP21114@gonzales>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7gGkHNMELEOhSGF6"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20111018054425.GP21114@gonzales>
X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc
X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: kicne
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: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /


--7gGkHNMELEOhSGF6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Tuesday, 2011-10-18 at 01:44 -0400 - Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>:

> * Tuesday, 2011-10-18 at 00:47 -0400 - Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>:
>=20
> > * Monday, 2011-10-17 at 19:46 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo=
=2Ecom>:
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
> > > > Maybe I finally understand what you mean with your "kinds =3D maxim=
al
> > > > 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 ne=
lci
> > > > lo pavyseljirna} =3D=3D {mi ca ca'a nelci lo ca ca'a pavyseljirna},=
 which is
> > > > false if there are no unicorns.
> > >=20
> > > I suppose the tense (if there is one) is as contextual as everything =
else about=20
> > > descriptions.  The same as the bridi surely is a good guess in genera=
l, but may=20
> > > be obviously wrong in other circumstances.  For example, in generalit=
ies, the=20
> > > tense (if that is the right notion) is probably past, present, future=
 and=20
> > > possible.
> >=20
> > Right, so I think I do understand you.
> >=20
> > Does this work?
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.

=2E..and then it might make sense to have {loi broda} be the same as {lo},
except that the plural referent is required to broda (rather than the
atoms below it brodaing). So while {lo pu cipnrdodo} could get the bunch
(aka plurality) of all dodos ever, {loi pu cipnrdodo} would have to get
a bunch all of which cipnrdodod at the same past time (which might imply
that they were all alive at the same time, or if dead at least not too
far decomposed...).

So this contains some of the essence of the historical meaning of {loi},
and is usefully distinct from (the understanding under discussion of)
{lo}.

Martin

--7gGkHNMELEOhSGF6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

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

iEYEARECAAYFAk6fGqEACgkQULC7OLX7LNZfNgCdHspDvPfnJH8PEdbQ61iMxyCs
1f8AoN8R0LHBnHDhYUKw9r81yBTd10gT
=U+/z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--7gGkHNMELEOhSGF6--