Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:63957)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhC8gZb1BBoEakmedQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RIMLD-0004kR-EZ; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:21:41 -0700
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf6711635pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:21:25 -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=nFgsWwQJ3Qfk6be0DMavhW6asP2KC60W+XeuJ5K+3Po=;
        b=MnX5DkohhSKkM3LPNAwTpfwTC6plPiFZP7HV/QxEb4H0lhLFPovWb/HwWOUpWISnVM
         s8GGxiA28JmBam3lU8xYCuWie6ND/GMjpbXNpTXp9U8qCwJfZzv8VWNHZ7ByW+7JALGK
         +d6zaNOxCQJ10wJmlF/1Cieihzunin9+AL1Ts=
Received: by 10.68.38.71 with SMTP id e7mr787285pbk.4.1319469244714;
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:14:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.119.115 with SMTP id kt19ls11166339pbb.4.gmail; Mon, 24 Oct
 2011 08:14:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.8.135 with SMTP id r7mr28124249pba.8.1319469243969;
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:14:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.8.135 with SMTP id r7mr28124241pba.8.1319469243944;
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:14:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l5si7518867pbe.2.2011.10.24.08.14.03
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:14:03 -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 p9OFE3Yc017264
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:14:03 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1RIMDy-0003A3-T0
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:14:02 -0400
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:14:02 -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: <20111024151402.GA3062@gonzales>
References: <20111021141620.GD28229@gonzales>
 <1319211982.72395.YahooMailRC@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20111021190055.GF28229@gonzales>
 <4E25E755-2FF6-4BDB-A5A4-5252845E0992@yahoo.com>
 <20111022030801.GG28229@gonzales>
 <1319308068.11247.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20111023203658.GH28229@gonzales>
 <1319404501.57946.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
 <20111023213304.GA3230@gonzales>
 <C988BE8A-398C-43F4-AE98-C0A1DF39C829@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <C988BE8A-398C-43F4-AE98-C0A1DF39C829@yahoo.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc
X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: jalge
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: /


--TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Sunday, 2011-10-23 at 18:57 -0400 - John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.co=
m>:

> I don't think I ever held that all flying albatrosses had to exist at
> a single time ( and I can't figure out what I said that would sound
> like that).  What I probably did say was that all flying albatrosses
> are in the domain of discourse when I say "Flying albatrosses look
> funny" as a full generalization.  Otherwise it wouldn't be a full
> generalization.  But that has nothing to do with either existence or
> time.
> I've forgotten what (i) is, so I am not sure (but then I have
> forgotten what Richard's semantics looks like in crucial details).
> Especially the generalized arbitrary partition bit.

The issue was simply whether, in {lo vofli cipnralbatrossa cu xajmi}, we
have
(a) a bunch of things, which is at some time a bunch of flying
albatrosses
or (b) a bunch of things each of which are at some time flying
albatrosses.

If {lo broda} has to get a bunch which satisfies {broda} (this is what
"(ii)" referred to), it seems we're forced to (a), which is no use for
making general statements.

> On kinds, my position is just that kinds (if you want to use that
> word) are just biggest bunches viewed in certain ways and so call for
> nothing other than things of the ordinary sort.  To be sure, the
> recent talk about mass nouns has made me start to think again about
> details, but even they don't lead me toward mass-like kinds from which
> individuals are temporarily carved out.  Not for Lojban anyhow.

I seem to be in agreement. But I guess no-one else is, so far.

Martin

> On Oct 23, 2011, at 17:33, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>=20
> > * Sunday, 2011-10-23 at 14:15 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo=
=2Ecom>:
> >=20
> >> Maybe I shouldn't have made the Buddhist crack, it does complicate mat=
ters.  If=20
> >> you take different times as separate worlds, then the ever-new view of=
 domains=20
> >> does turn out to be like xorxes stages.  That is certainly not my inte=
ntion, on=20
> >> either view (though the problem doesn't arise on the always-same view)=
 [I=20
> >> actually tend to be a nominalist in a rather strict sense and so close=
r to Hans'=20
> >> discourse representation, which never officially gets behind the words=
=2E But that=20
> >> is not relevant here.]  But given that alway-new sense and taking time=
s as=20
> >> worlds, your description of the situation is essentially correct (and =
its vague=20
> >> feeling of absurdity is one of the problems with that interpretation).=
  The=20
> >> connection between the two sets of albatrosses is not merely anaphora,=
 but=20
> >> something involving vectors in time or some such analogy - "world line=
s" is a=20
> >> nice cover term (which, alas, also seem to reify the connections -- an=
 old=20
> >> problem for Buddhists, too).  Of course, "here now" does cut things do=
wn to=20
> >> existents, pretty sharply (I suppose someone could argue, .... .  But =
why=20
> >> bother?). The point is that Lojban quantifiers do not add "and exists"=
, ever. =20
> >> That comes out of the predicates, if at all.  As to whether the former=
 flying=20
> >> albatrosses are flying now, that is hard to say (partly because it is =
unclear=20
> >> just what is being asked); in some cases they are in the current domai=
n of=20
> >> discourse and in the extensions of both "albatross" and "flying", but =
it is not=20
> >> clear whether the current domain of discourse is tightly correlated wi=
th "now". =20
> >> And, of course, there is no rule that requires either the always-new=
=20
> >> interpretation of things nor the worlds view of time.  There are advan=
tages and=20
> >> disadvantages to all of these choices.
> >>=20
> >> A reasonable view (except for the=20
> >> complexities that spelling it out exactly involves) is that each world=
 extends=20
> >> through time, with things coming into existence and falling out as tim=
e goes=20
> >> along, i.e., that our world is a typical world.  The formal gains of d=
eviating=20
> >> from this view have to be pretty impressive to justify shifting from i=
t.  On=20
> >> that view, the ten minutes ago's flying albatrosses still exist (most =
of them=20
> >> anyhow usually) but are no longer flying (the ones we can see, anyhow)=
 and they=20
> >> did look funny and so contribute to the general claim that flying alba=
trosses=20
> >> look funny, even though they now look quite sedate -- largely because =
they are=20
> >> not flying.
> >=20
> > But the point was that we needed all flying albatrosses to satisfy "is
> > flying" at a single time for the (ii) interpretation of {lo} to work.
> > I thought you were claiming this.
> >=20
> > If you're not... I'm relieved!
> >=20
> > What you wrote from "A reasonable view" on seems to agree with the
> > kind of universe I'd been assuming (i.e. that of Montague's PTQ).
> >=20
> > So do we agree that (i), or your generalised arbitrary-partition version
> > (is), is needed to do kinds-like things with {lo} (assuming we want to
> > avoid introducing xorxes-kinds)?
> >=20
> > Martin
>=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

--TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

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

iEYEARECAAYFAk6lgLoACgkQULC7OLX7LNZevQCgglZOC0k73tchDNVSU+RQrnlE
738AnR7UKDhzJXs2ZyHlcZo1ocYHuXb+
=umH+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--TB36FDmn/VVEgNH/--