Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]:65404)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhCOh4b1BBoE4coX9A@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RHGDf-00041G-V3; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 07:37:19 -0700
Received: by ggnr4 with SMTP id r4sf6344231ggn.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 07:37:05 -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=S7d+ovDKxg4pRIKfVcvJ1Bvsv8yZeH/Z4Fu28lEqCbU=;
        b=GcDDvzXV/0lRgb1PfuS203iVjiaAR9CCmPf4yJcCKdMSMV4fVo6fcKFV4ORfCBBCDa
         2m0WJjjdIF9EGPRWk0LvCDp0E41QEyQbRhe+/4Mo7XH+//cYCUp6bsyhw8gESOy9wR9/
         rvaDVWjA4fF96hhdH/fWve5fi4wN16Koiv+qk=
Received: by 10.150.225.20 with SMTP id x20mr4108862ybg.14.1319207822947;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 07:37:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.74.5 with SMTP id p5ls12492217pbv.7.gmail; Fri, 21 Oct 2011
 07:37:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.46.193 with SMTP id x1mr15430403pbm.7.1319207821161;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 07:37:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.46.193 with SMTP id x1mr15430402pbm.7.1319207821148;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 07:37:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id lf12si11000084pbb.2.2011.10.21.07.37.01
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 07:37:01 -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 p9LEaxDx004404
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:37:00 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1RHFtU-0003lP-Ke
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:16:20 -0400
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:16:20 -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: <20111021141620.GD28229@gonzales>
References: <1318906003.98760.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20111018044730.GB30548@gonzales>
 <20111018054425.GP21114@gonzales>
 <20111019184449.GC5010@gonzales>
 <1319076660.7053.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20111020024132.GH5010@gonzales>
 <E7E854FB-384D-4137-B4C4-F200D8FAFFB7@yahoo.com>
 <20111021001006.GA28229@gonzales>
 <30281CDD-EDDD-4C0C-B69E-C5CCF5DD0DA5@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tEFtbjk+mNEviIIX"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <30281CDD-EDDD-4C0C-B69E-C5CCF5DD0DA5@yahoo.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc
X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: stuzi
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: /


--tEFtbjk+mNEviIIX
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Friday, 2011-10-21 at 05:51 -0400 - John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.co=
m>:

> I think there may be other possibilities.  For example, {lo broda} may
> return a bunch, all of the subbunches in a partition of which broda in
> sense i.

OK, we can call that sense (is).

('s' being the roman numeral for 1/2, apparently)

> So, the glorked (whence this word btw) have to be unicorns in
> some world.  Why not in this one?

Because there aren't any unicorns in it.

How about if it had been "flying dodos look silly"? Would you want the
flying dodos to be in this present world (by which I mean: to ca ca'a
vofli je cipnrdodo)?

> That is my intention; otherwise I have a mess of problems about cross-
> worlds identity  and the meaning of predication (which, partly,
> I suppose, is why you want to add {ka'e}).

I don't see how you can coherently get around this mess.

> Now, depending on the context, {lo pavelseljirna cu lazni} may or may
> not take us to a world where unicorns exist, but the point is that it
> does not have to; we can and do fold nonexistent unicorns -- items in
> the extension of {pavelsejirna} -- into our current domain of
> discourse, which depends on what we say, not on the facts.

It seems you have some very different setup for handling tenses and
intension than the one I've been assuming - in which there might well be
entities in the domain of discourse which satisfy pavyseljirna_w for
some worlds w, but they won't satisfy pavyseljirna_{w_0} for this world
w_0, because no unicorns currently exist.

Could you explain your setup? I don't see what it could be.

Martin

> On Oct 20, 2011, at 20:10, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>=20
> > * Thursday, 2011-10-20 at 12:26 -0400 - John E. Clifford <kali9putra@ya=
hoo.com>:
> >=20
> >> Now I am mor con used than before.  Why is there only one bunch off
> >> people living in glass houses and why must they all exist at one time
> >> / in one world, and why can't they?  I am unclear what restrictions
> >> you are placing on worlds an domains.  I am also unclear as to what
> >> you think the logical form of "People who live in glass houses should
> >> install proper insulation" is.
> >=20
> > Hmm. Probably I'm making some assumption which you're not, leading to
> > confusion. But I'm not sure what that assumption might be. So let me
> > just express again the issue in different words:
> >=20
> > Ignoring all the more subtle issues we've been discussing, there are two
> > basic possible bunch-theoretic meanings for {lo}. When applied to
> > a unary predicate P, it either=20
> > (i) returns a bunch X such that P(X)
> > or (ii) returns a bunch X such that for every atom x below X, P(x).
> >=20
> > ("atom x below X" could also be written "individual x in the bunch X";
> > I'll continue to use the 'atom' terminology because I think it best
> > indicates that individuals aren't disjoint from bunches - individuals
> > are just "singleton" bunches. I'll use the notation "x <=3D X" to mean
> > that x is an atom below X (so lower case variables are "singular
> > variables", i.e. are variables on the atoms sort))
> >=20
> > If we write {lo pavyseljirna cu lazni} to mean "unicorns are lazy"
> > (which I believe is true - who ever heard of a pack-unicorn or
> > a unicorn-plough?), the unary predicate in question is probably
> > (slightly) more precisely expressed by {ka'e pavyseljirna}, and is:
> >=20
> > U(X) <=3D> "there exists a world w such that pavyseljirna(X) in w".
> >=20
> > Under (i) we get:
> >=20
> > {lo pavyseljirna cu lazni}
> >    -> GL X:U(X). lazni(X)
> >    =3D=3D "for a glorked bunch X such that U(X) holds, lazni(X) holds"
> >=20
> > whereas under (ii) we get:
> >=20
> > {lo pavyseljirna cu lazni}
> >    -> GL X:(FA x <=3D X. U(x)). lazni(X)
> >    =3D=3D "for a glorked bunch X such that U(x) holds for every atom
> >    x below X, lazni(X) holds" .
> >=20
> > Substituting in the definition of U and using distributivity, under (i)=
 we get:
> >=20
> > GL X:(EX w. pavyseljirna_w(X)). lazni(X)
> >    =3D=3D GL X:(EX w. FA x <=3D X. pavyseljirna_w(x)). lazni(X)
> >    =3D=3D "for a glorked bunch X such that for some world every atom be=
low
> >    X is a unicorn, X is lazy"
> >=20
> > while under (ii) we get:
> >=20
> > GL X:(FA x <=3D X. EX w. pavyseljirna_w(x)). lazni(X)
> >    =3D=3D "for a glorked X such that for every atom below X there is
> >    a world in which it is a unicorn, X is lazy" .
> >=20
> > So the (ii) case is the one we want, if we want to get at the sense of
> > the english "unicorns are lazy".
> >=20
> > Did that make any more sense?
> >=20
> > Martin
> >=20
> >> On Oct 19, 2011, at 22:41, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> >>=20
> >>> * Wednesday, 2011-10-19 at 19:11 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@=
yahoo.com>:
> >>>=20
> >>>> U\I'm not going to worry about {loi} etc. until I am sutre about {lo=
} and then=20
> >>>> 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?
> >>>=20
> >>> Hmm. So you'd want every dodo which ever lived to now cipnrdodo - even
> >>> if it doesn't zasti, nevermind jmive?
> >>>=20
> >>> That might work for some cases, but what if we want to say "people in
> >>> glass houses should install proper insulation"? Even if the people in
> >>> question (who mostly don't zasti in this possible world, nevermind no=
w)
> >>> were to ca ca'a prenu, they surely couldn't ca ca'a nenri su'o blaci
> >>> zdani; nor is there any other world in which they all do.
> >>>=20
> >>> So the bunch of them doesn't satisfy {prenu gi'e nenri su'o blaci
> >>> zdani} - since there's only one bunch, we would need that the bunch
> >>> satisfies this in some given world. It doesn't.
> >>>=20
> >>> But each atom (person, in this case) in the bunch does satisfy {prenu
> >>> gi'e nenri su'o blaci zdani}. So for {lo prenu poi nenri su'o blaci
> >>> zdani} to get the bunch, we'd need the quantifier over worlds to go
> >>> inside a quantifier over the bunch. The gadri seems the right place
> >>> to specify this.
> >>>=20
> >>> Martin
> >>>=20
> >>>> ----- 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=20
> >>>> variable
> >>>>=20
> >>>> * Tuesday, 2011-10-18 at 01:44 -0400 - Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>:
> >>>>=20
> >>>>> * 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=20
> >>>> <kali9putra@yahoo.com>:
> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
> >>>>>>> From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
> >>>>>>>> Maybe I finally understand what you mean with your "kinds =3D ma=
ximal
> >>>>>>>> bunches" idea. Let's see.
> >>>>>>>>=20
> >>>>>>>> I've been implicitly assuming that in {lo broda}, the tense insi=
de 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 pavyseljirn=
a}, which is
> >>>>>>>> false if there are no unicorns.
> >>>>>>>=20
> >>>>>>> I suppose the tense (if there is one) is as contextual as everyth=
ing else=20
> >>>>> about=20
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>>>> descriptions.  The same as the bridi surely is a good guess in ge=
neral, but=20
> >>>>> may=20
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>>>> be obviously wrong in other circumstances.  For example, in gener=
alities,=20
> >>>>> the=20
> >>>>>=20
> >>>>>>> tense (if that is the right notion) is probably past, present, fu=
ture 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 b=
roda}
> >>>>> is meant to satisfy broda, what tense can give us e.g. all dodos ev=
er?
> >>>>> 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 brod=
a},
> >>>>> rather than {lo broda cu broda}, for this to work.
> >>>>=20
> >>>> ...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 b=
unch
> >>>> (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 i=
mply
> >>>> that they were all alive at the same time, or if dead at least not t=
oo
> >>>> far decomposed...).
> >>>>=20
> >>>> So this contains some of the essence of the historical meaning of {l=
oi},
> >>>> and is usefully distinct from (the understanding under discussion of)
> >>>> {lo}.
> >>>>=20
> >>>> Martin
> >>>>=20
> >>>> --=20
> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google G=
roups "lojban" group.
> >>>> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@goo=
glegroups.com.
> >>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group=
/lojban?hl=3Den.
> >>=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

--tEFtbjk+mNEviIIX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

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

iEYEARECAAYFAk6hfrQACgkQULC7OLX7LNYUdACgnGwL1cV6CldypOCjzMZDE2KD
f4gAoKcLUmmxOYWEKhn/g7iDpPfnLzsc
=cF0V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--tEFtbjk+mNEviIIX--