Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:54539)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhDN0Zb1BBoEM9b-dw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RIOtf-0005iI-8o; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:05:54 -0700
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf6802030pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:05:03 -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=6Bao3r90oLIM1i+A8awse8Exgsx4hbwCOVocper5ccI=;
        b=fFE+Z64Xr2cn+334iFxMnk9mSU7cO9HYQvWGt4/AxpJYC46NlVV/709sIUD+QAjDp2
         YgZNTmdO36Sc32dvPLB6kdTH1GT6EkvDDyWpu3Xc6gc1XTTtFQLX+BFpclqOHhjmjPkn
         fcFIJQA4kaHO7l+TgNSd3BfnMjL6lte2UlK4Q=
Received: by 10.68.7.197 with SMTP id l5mr5002561pba.14.1319479501199;
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:05:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.119.115 with SMTP id kt19ls11634956pbb.4.gmail; Mon, 24 Oct
 2011 11:05:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.27.132 with SMTP id t4mr418010pbg.3.1319479500409;
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:05:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.27.132 with SMTP id t4mr418001pbg.3.1319479500396;
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:05:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l3si13058284pbd.0.2011.10.24.11.05.00
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:05:00 -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 p9OI4xdm001409
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 18:04:59 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1RIOtP-0000aD-8s
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:04:59 -0400
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:04:59 -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: <20111024180459.GB3062@gonzales>
References: <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>
 <20111024151402.GA3062@gonzales>
 <491E2B09-A98B-406D-B7A4-CC2710BEF850@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oC1+HKm2/end4ao3"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <491E2B09-A98B-406D-B7A4-CC2710BEF850@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: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /


--oC1+HKm2/end4ao3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Monday, 2011-10-24 at 13:53 -0400 - John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.co=
m>:

> English is a bitch language for pre vision work, so I am still not
> perfectly what your point or question is.  So let me say again: the
> referents of {lo vofli cipnralbatrossa} are all flying albatrosses,
> some of them existing now and some of these flying now, but most
> nonflying current albatrosses and and past and future ones.  They are
> in the current domain of discourse and in the corresponding extensions
> of "albatross" and "flying" (time labeled) but not generally in the
> extension of "exists"(although there is a long discussion about that,
> which I think my notion of domain resolves).

And those in the extension of "flying" at a certain time are also in the
extension of "exists" at that time? Similarly with "albatross" in place
of "flying"?

> Does that answer your question and agree with your point?

Assuming the answer to the above is yes, then I think so.



> On Oct 24, 2011, at 11:14, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>=20
> > * Sunday, 2011-10-23 at 18:57 -0400 - John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yaho=
o.com>:
> >=20
> >> 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.
> >=20
> > 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.
> >=20
> > 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.
> >=20
> >> 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.
> >=20
> > I seem to be in agreement. But I guess no-one else is, so far.

--oC1+HKm2/end4ao3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

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

iEYEARECAAYFAk6lqMsACgkQULC7OLX7LNYHFwCeK3OA+sv+UyktE+7mrbx3I4yM
HoIAnRxYHTe85libC+W/+jO9CQptu5Zq
=nvmi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--oC1+HKm2/end4ao3--