Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:50995)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhC_07X1BBoEjDC-tA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RKX5U-0000sM-HL; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 08:14:24 -0700
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf8060273pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 08:14:10 -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=a1hQA5eCxMEOY1LQ+pQ3vR28kSrQM1UzWa0iR2urfpQ=;
        b=QLxwwIghyAtnKGr/P/ndQnh1m+NniwYajPP4R9liXNzLV6gTmceA74PjFgXV37V/v+
         8WSxvheC/5kikHZwIjLxGTfyPXQIOp+k8bUbO7Bgaqy4xM9VzjqMvJbTeADXWeZxdwhW
         ibHLKExvt/fVZbGhW8w427Fh6KNR7+Du0+7/w=
Received: by 10.68.22.69 with SMTP id b5mr1134840pbf.11.1319987647939;
        Sun, 30 Oct 2011 08:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.12.106 with SMTP id x10ls12260514pbb.3.gmail; Sun, 30 Oct
 2011 08:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.0.170 with SMTP id 10mr6525307pbf.2.1319987646961;
        Sun, 30 Oct 2011 08:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.0.170 with SMTP id 10mr6525306pbf.2.1319987646952;
        Sun, 30 Oct 2011 08:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r5si9457960pbe.1.2011.10.30.08.14.06
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sun, 30 Oct 2011 08:14:06 -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 p9UFE6IX000329
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 15:14:06 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1RKX5J-00030j-Rp
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 11:14:05 -0400
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 11:14:05 -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: <20111030151405.GC32586@gonzales>
References: <4EA7BF06.5050103@gmail.com>
 <4EAA8AC9.2010000@gmail.com>
 <20111029001437.GA5535@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2f4jH3Y-45PwMN=KZFMtxjHA7dbmU8en=NDZL=eS=o9PQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20111029145956.GB9385@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2c49SHSsw98hxgb0AxBP9WKWAYHBs6n2gzb29Mh6e-3ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20111029221510.GA32586@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2d5kcG8N=hsCDgdbW8Qs4ShvUBb8K1iH5jmAa+WSWfdtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20111030044700.GB32586@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2dFwiGNY3F2fU-FoXk1Y6OksR6GO_j3kXsTV1F5kRPK2A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RIYY1s2vRbPFwWeW"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2dFwiGNY3F2fU-FoXk1Y6OksR6GO_j3kXsTV1F5kRPK2A@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc
X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: re
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: /


--RIYY1s2vRbPFwWeW
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Sunday, 2011-10-30 at 11:08 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.co=
m>:

> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> >
> > I suppose the point is that effectively forcing *distributivity* is
> > possible, in this way. But I don't know what could force
> > non-distributivity, unless we actually have ambiguous predicates.
>=20
> We do have predicates that are non-commital about distributivity. In
> "ko'a bevri ko'e", and assuming both ko'a and ko'e have more than one
> referent each, we don't know (and possibly don't care) how the loads
> were distributed. If we say "the men carried the tools to the shed" we
> may not know which of the men carried which of the tools, whether some
> tool was carried by more than one man, whether some man carried more
> than one tool, and so on.

Right, but that isn't actual ambiguity of the predicate, just laxness in
its truth conditions. If we wanted using {lVi} to give more information,
it would have to be by claiming or denying bevri for some subbunches of
ko'a and/or ko'e. I don't see any possibilities which would do anything
useful and sensible.

> >> She could have said: ".ei no roi ku su'o da poi cinfo zo'u do klama lo
> >> jibni be da".
> >
> > With that being clearer just because it would be perverse to
> > existentially quantify over a singleton set, indicating that the
> > intended domain probably has multiple things which cinfo?
>=20
> Right.
>=20
> > But they could
> > just as well be multiple kinds of lion rather than individual lions?
>=20
> Yes, but that would still be enough to forbid Moople from getting
> close to any kind of lion, even if he accepted the existence of kinds
> for a minute.
>=20
> > I think she ought to be able to be even clearer.
>=20
> She should say "su'o do" and "su'o jibni" for extra safety.
>=20
> >> (I first wrote "ko" instead of "do", but that suggests the scope of
> >> the imperative is within the scope of "no roi", which seems wrong.
> >
> > Hmm... I'd have thought that the imperativeness of {ko}, like the
> > questioniness of {ma} and perhaps the constancy of {lo}, beats ordinary
> > quantifiers. Any reason to have it otherwise?
>=20
> It just sounds wrong to me. Fortunately in the case of "ko", I can
> always replace it with ".ei ... do" and place ".ei" at the right
> level.

And {.ei} is affected by scope?

{.ei mi klama su'o zarci} -> I have to go to a market
{mi klama su'o zarci vau .ei} -> There's a market I have to go to
{su'o zarci mi .ei se klama} -> There's a market I have to go to
?

Sounds good, though I don't see immediately what the scope rules should
be (e.g. would it make a difference in the third sentence had I written
{su'o zarci .ei [...]}? How about {su'o zarci ku .ei [...]}? Or do these
in any case indicate that it's the market which should be coming to
me? And is there a subtle difference between the second and third
sentences?).

> >> In any case the moral of the story was that there are sound
> >> evolutionary reasons for the kind approach, since obviously we are all
> >> descended from Cless and he is the one that got the right meaning. :)
> >
> > Somehow this doesn't seem to be the moral I've taken. Maybe Moople had
> > a cousin with individuating parents?
>=20
> But what language do they speak? Not English, because in English we
> can say "lions are dangerous, don't go near them".

Yes, but we mean something about individual lions when we say it
- namely that they tend to be dangerous.

--RIYY1s2vRbPFwWeW
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

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

iEYEARECAAYFAk6tab0ACgkQULC7OLX7LNbX2ACfQk4jn2LBGzAdw0kZ0IukTTyP
X2MAoILxfc/fbTtK1Fc2QF14VxjgXJAe
=2go2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--RIYY1s2vRbPFwWeW--