Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]:44048)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRC2hv70BBoEzItSKw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RGi6B-0004Wg-V0; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:22 -0700
Received: by yxi13 with SMTP id 13sf3276753yxi.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:05 -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-property:x-yahoo-newman-id
         :x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references:message-id:date:from:subject:to
         :in-reply-to:mime-version: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;
        bh=HWy/3EevZ3Ik7rYOj5jGq5vju1K3Jnewvb4+CoqlRKQ=;
        b=kVskbYNO7JAAT3c+DC199YniKeYTh6UKSdN2EHvLd6tYGU8z9UewQekrwYDLvfX2Uw
         /xFxhOctouX5P0PaBJWuzoBfJGg0NIBIDB8IIr1V5ApWOYZcVD0r348FTjcYDSMQzm4I
         KJgjgJX9RWDq9piKoPtpBGkjKoKiqBTEqMqu4=
Received: by 10.150.58.6 with SMTP id g6mr2568652yba.20.1319076662468;
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.100.56.20 with SMTP id e20ls10849653ana.5.gmail; Wed, 19 Oct
 2011 19:11:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.185.197 with SMTP id u45mr15383239yhm.6.1319076660744;
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.185.197 with SMTP id u45mr15383238yhm.6.1319076660735;
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm8.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm8.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com. [66.94.237.209])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id r12si3179537ybi.3.2011.10.19.19.11.00;
        Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.237.209 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.237.209;
Received: from [66.94.237.199] by nm8.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Oct 2011 02:11:00 -0000
Received: from [66.94.237.101] by tm10.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Oct 2011 02:11:00 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1006.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Oct 2011 02:11:00 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 240861.23891.bm@omp1006.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 7566 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Oct 2011 02:11:00 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: Zt0ufaQVM1nOAZtEBX7HSu7poTZLQtpKDTGa.fEDgAMTiB3
 A.ibr.Y6GWljrMEmjSa2ckBVTHCunny94A_75KzxuzZORmOI_terRjXdGSOL
 w.mz3L04YGTI4s7aZ96KcJzePh0MCJNlqjhYBxNmRRN26XH0JXV7HedLHqLA
 9OLOYKfghdUWtrgJm_JMuiwcgT3MRi6OSeiGUZ4SRyrGsyYgPayvTdEGkNWh
 7EGSXFuqWBfi.AIBQd4mifi3LimAtCmB5y8OBvE5koyA_feJP7aP26_hHpcY
 mlvQGM0vSgLeqGV1yThc88T0hutbAzP3xZcPYCLvyWA.VbM8ffkXMv30PLke
 LYSn05MkGNJ8wt.ImF_CW3kxGWzEUX9KOqiCg_3yTXzAG1TdR61yGMR92LGR
 hoToOvQkAsKUTeROJccb0kdqDae8pnjkT53tg78SUaVVlMK3ZQcuDhVOel2u
 BCr5nfnpFPr3j
Received: from [99.92.108.41] by web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:00 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/574 YahooMailWebService/0.8.114.317681
References: <1318906003.98760.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20111018044730.GB30548@gonzales> <20111018054425.GP21114@gonzales> <20111019184449.GC5010@gonzales>
Message-ID: <1319076660.7053.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
In-Reply-To: <20111019184449.GC5010@gonzales>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 66.94.237.209
 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
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

U\I'm not going to worry about {loi} etc. until I am sutre about {lo} and then 
see what is lefyt over that needs dealing with.  {lo cipnrdodo) refers to all 
the dodos there ever were (suppose that is right for this context), all of which 
are thus in the domain of discourse and also in the extension of {cipnrdodo}.  
What problem are you having; I just don't see it?


----- Original Message ----
From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, October 19, 2011 1:44:49 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural 
variable

* 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>:
> 
> > * Monday, 2011-10-17 at 19:46 -0700 - John E Clifford 
<kali9putra@yahoo.com>:
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
> > > > Maybe I finally understand what you mean with your "kinds = 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} == {mi ca ca'a nelci lo ca ca'a pavyseljirna}, which is
> > > > false if there are no unicorns.
> > > 
> > > I suppose the tense (if there is one) is as contextual as everything else 
>about 
>
> > > descriptions.  The same as the bridi surely is a good guess in general, but 
>may 
>
> > > be obviously wrong in other circumstances.  For example, in generalities, 
>the 
>
> > > tense (if that is the right notion) is probably past, present, future and 
> > > possible.
> > 
> > Right, so I think I do understand you.
> > 
> > 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.

...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

-- 
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@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.