Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]:46502)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDP19b1BBoELdYvyQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RMnsX-0002jK-Iw; Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:34:24 -0700
Received: by wye20 with SMTP id 20sf7427839wye.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from: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=rJXGi+zG1OVG/+miO5LQxwiK5VL42Le60SHKT+1MwkI=;
        b=HmMQt/XNN563WXksihZxX7XF1GLT2BX4Evb/mBO4Ixvax2Yb/riSp0QwfHAA+p+Dmc
         AirFLcXOyg1ePEMwbvOJ2tuApsZHBG0Wg4fUfmMz43LMzfnQ+oNcm9oid4YgRDFXGdj1
         LrUQEUns7k8J2geJ4gcIj2tlL+sRqXwgxmAyQ=
Received: by 10.216.139.204 with SMTP id c54mr713052wej.61.1320528847524;
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.14.21.22 with SMTP id q22ls487102eeq.6.canary; Sat, 05 Nov
 2011 14:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.213.27.206 with SMTP id j14mr328151ebc.4.1320528846544;
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.213.27.206 with SMTP id j14mr328150ebc.4.1320528846515;
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f48.google.com (mail-fx0-f48.google.com [209.85.161.48])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t21si2479534faf.0.2011.11.05.14.34.06
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.48;
Received: by faap19 with SMTP id p19so838129faa.35
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.112.10 with SMTP id im10mr3462993lab.2.1320528846314; Sat,
 05 Nov 2011 14:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.19.198 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Nov 2011 14:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20111105205810.GJ24058@gonzales>
References: <4EB43035.6040407@gmail.com>
	<20111104233756.GB24058@gonzales>
	<CAO7tK2dzo0vjzQLwQObDo3GnOrjvEEE6_6K1wb0+a=On-H_gzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111105051200.GD24058@gonzales>
	<CAO7tK2cWRu-KW8Nbd7+a1fpB9va=YinWw=L73WDppcc2=_YSMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111105151953.GG24058@gonzales>
	<20111105153425.GH24058@gonzales>
	<CAO7tK2cfkbM4DVKSTHwVXWzm7TCRK4fW4aHEwq-r6OxeRnUM5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111105162316.GA835@gonzales>
	<CAO7tK2fALx9b887aNhdW8wpt_jJDBwrUEH1EhTW9jSD4kznheg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111105205810.GJ24058@gonzales>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 18:34:06 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2ds6t7C5CwNKuLXYXwMkZxivs9-kxZ8jz2tkdHg0hfyTw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=jjllambias@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
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> * Saturday, 2011-11-05 at 14:03 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmai=
l.com>:
>
>>  My first choice would be to use the same individuation
>> criteria for both "xabju" and "na'e xabju", since they are almost the
>> same predicate.
>
> OK. Presumably if I kept modifying {xabju} and {na'e xabju}, we'd
> eventually find a sentence where you consider the two readings to be
> approximately equally plausible.
>
> I know I've asked such questions before, but please allow me to do it
> again: how would you make it clear that you meant to use the same
> individuation criteria here?

Maybe use the very same predicate: "ro prenu poi xabju", "su'o prenu
poi na'e xabju".

>Or in the beret example, how would you
> express the surprising claim that all french people really do all wear
> the same individual mundane non-kind hat?

I don't know, use whatever predicate ends up being used to mean
"particular individual". Maybe "kantu":
"su'o mapku kantu cu se dasni ro faspre"?

>> But we are not talking about any logical deductions here.
>
> No, just lojbanic deductions. It distresses me that these concepts
> should be so different!

But how could it be otherwise? In most contexts the kind of deductions
that you can make within a given discourse without using knowledge
external to the discourse itself is extremely limited.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--=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.