Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]:34072)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCNuStaWoDxD2mof1BBoEMGw9pw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RHLFW-0007AY-D1; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:59:34 -0700
Received: by wwg7 with SMTP id 7sf7423417wwg.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:59:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:date:from:user-agent
         :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to: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
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=dvzN5wFAa6wVL/LuvDAn6/cAX+sFNazONVjJml/xg3M=;
        b=vimOZOYpkcKMLkxcWHyVJgYeeTRRrBY5hzgK9FuEJWnwzNgxqUwQY6AmUs4oRcbpTy
         EfHSCnPuxxag6gwC0u9i7rDAKWa9AsFKsY/TzXI/WqqCG/h+GlL0nF39J4rlq0elTtM5
         xjgB98b3mqc73Gz1BEJoAJtfwI3UMhpY62lWs=
Received: by 10.216.159.138 with SMTP id s10mr1349795wek.25.1319226742894;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:52:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.227.91.77 with SMTP id l13ls12436147wbm.4.gmail; Fri, 21 Oct
 2011 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.12.16 with SMTP id v16mr474821wbv.6.1319226741929;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.12.16 with SMTP id v16mr474820wbv.6.1319226741902;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fd1si6852807wbb.0.2011.10.21.12.52.21
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.182 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.182;
Received: by wyi40 with SMTP id 40so5642647wyi.13
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.88.140 with SMTP id a12mr5634373wef.82.1319226741464;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.75] (87-194-76-177.bethere.co.uk. [87.194.76.177])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fw16sm15932078wbb.13.2011.10.21.12.52.19
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:52:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4EA1CD72.7010608@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:52:18 +0100
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.22) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/3.1.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
References: <1318202744.44997.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <201110201551.34676.phma@phma.optus.nu> <4EA0D3C2.4050708@gmail.com> <201110202325.23106.phma@phma.optus.nu> <20111021041242.GC28229@gonzales> <4EA15CE9.3000900@gmail.com> <1319211343.75477.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4EA1A37B.4010905@gmail.com> <F8289CC5-A441-4295-BB01-5AADA1314D84@yahoo.com> <4EA1B543.1000705@gmail.com> <A169D12D-2FB0-4F3D-854C-E4A7E7440C51@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <A169D12D-2FB0-4F3D-854C-E4A7E7440C51@yahoo.com>
X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.182 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=and.rosta@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.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; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

John E. Clifford, On 21/10/2011 20:26:
> ? because any number attached to {djacu} would be wrong; there would
> be both more and fewer quantities of water involved(aside from the
> case of deionized molecules, say)?

Yes.

> I don't think that is in keeping
> with Lojban thinking, which would take the number to be the number of
> separate puddles or whatever.

One presumes that the criteria for individuating apples are specified in th=
e semanticon entry for {plise}, since these criteria are intrinsic to the d=
efinition of applehood. But is the same true for {djacu} -- that the semant=
icon specifies precisely what does and does not count as a single amount of=
 water, and that for any distribution of water, these criteria will yield o=
nly one possible cardinality for the quantity of amounts of water in that d=
istribution?

> Internal quantifier in descriptions
> would be more problematic, since you might usually be able to get
> more bits out than the quantifier says were in. I am inclined to
> think that not having mass nouns was a mistake, except that the logic
> of them was so poorly worked out back then (and has bad gaps even
> now). This does not seem to me to be a reason to shift over -- to get
> back to something like the stated topic -- to like massy things like
> kinds or whatever.

I'm not yet convinced that {djacu} is not a mass noun. But anyway, as I sai=
d in an earlier reply to you when you made the same point, even if no gismu=
 is a mass noun, nothing (afaik) precludes another brivla or cmene from bei=
ng a mass noun, so Lojban does have mass nouns.

Obviously by "having mass noun", you and I mean sumti (places) thathave mas=
s-noun-like semantics.

--And.

>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 21, 2011, at 14:09, And Rosta<and.rosta@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> John E. Clifford, On 21/10/2011 19:00:
>>> Sorry, I seem to have missed the point.  I took the failure of {su'o dj=
acu} to be because  "at least one" did not get to the minimum possibility, =
hence the need to go to "more than zero".  But that was me getting mixed up=
 in the surrounding talk about{pi} and {lo}.
>>
>> No, I did say that as an afterthought, and I was wrong. {su'o djacu} doe=
s work. What doesn't work is any specific cardinal other than ci'i. So {pa =
djacu} and {re djacu} fail, by the Goatleg rule, which says that bare PA me=
ans "exactly PA, no more and no less".
>>
>> --And.
>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Oct 21, 2011, at 12:53, And Rosta<and.rosta@gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>> John E Clifford, On 21/10/2011 16:35:
>>>>> I don't see why; {djacu} is as quantized as every other Lojban predic=
ate.
>>>>
>>>> You don't agree that half an amount of water is also an amount of wate=
r?
>>>>
>>>> --And.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: And Rosta<and.rosta@gmail.com>
>>>>> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
>>>>> Sent: Fri, October 21, 2011 6:52:09 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified =
plural
>>>>> variable
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin Bays, On 21/10/2011 05:12:
>>>>>> * Thursday, 2011-10-20 at 23:25 -0400 - Pierre Abbat<phma@phma.optus=
.nu>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thursday 20 October 2011 22:06:58 And Rosta wrote:
>>>>>>>> When I was last up-to-date with developments, nothing was official=
, but I
>>>>>>>> think I can recall the rudiments of our best efforts at that time =
to
>>>>>>>> construct a consistent and rational gadri system. As far as I now =
recall,
>>>>>>>> "half an apple" would be "lo pi mu plise", while "pi mu lo plise" =
would be
>>>>>>>> the "one in every two apples" one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If "pimu lo plise" means "one in every two apples", then "pa lo pli=
se" should
>>>>>>> mean "every apple". I think "lo pimu plise" is "a half apple"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But {lo PA broda cu broda} is meant to be a tautology. Half-apples
>>>>>> aren't apples.
>>>>>
>>>>> So {lo pi mu plise cu plise} fails that test, but {lo pi mu djacu cu =
djacu}
>>>>> passes it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Following a line of thought that that observation initiates, I note t=
hat by the
>>>>> Goatleg rule, {su'o plise} is okay but {su'o djacu} is not and would =
instead
>>>>> have to be {za'u djacu} or {ci'i djacu}.
>>>>>
>>>>> --And.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group=
s "lojban" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googleg=
roups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/loj=
ban?hl=3Den.
>>
>

--=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@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.