Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]:48667) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RN9P7-0004DP-Cg; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:28 -0800 Received: by wye20 with SMTP id 20sf8538034wye.16 for ; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:13 -0800 (PST) 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; bh=ZE3XrHB8Wxyqqo1GqiX1L8DgyQG7AT5yglDHPCAKvtQ=; b=ye2wDDsdlRXJifgbRFt0E+QbgsZHt536I/6OZCE0piO+A6QMIVOO/2O3FmFqE9Avr7 zBnfeyPyIBhVbGV60zCgKUoGO7ELCMoPrSqYeEIksVF24mlLsVIOU3veXUsVYAGou/TP tpnf+FSSAe2WNDPp2NHoBGpSZ2OTMe9syxwjc= Received: by 10.180.7.138 with SMTP id j10mr2551336wia.1.1320611591379; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:11 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.181.11.226 with SMTP id el2ls2644324wid.0.gmail; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.155.82 with SMTP id i60mr402334wek.0.1320611590767; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.155.82 with SMTP id i60mr402333wek.0.1320611590750; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com (mail-wy0-f174.google.com [74.125.82.174]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id es13si8743777wbb.3.2011.11.06.12.33.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:10 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.174 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.174; Received: by wyh15 with SMTP id 15so3878666wyh.19 for ; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.208.71 with SMTP id gb7mr26175312wbb.7.1320611590622; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.84] (87-194-76-177.bethere.co.uk. [87.194.76.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q30sm25080291wbn.17.2011.11.06.12.33.09 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:33:09 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4EB6EF04.9070301@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 20:33:08 +0000 From: And Rosta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110920 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable References: <20111104233756.GB24058@gonzales> <4EB4A123.7030305@gmail.com> <20111105061247.GE24058@gonzales> <4EB526B7.7070008@gmail.com> <20111105172216.GI24058@gonzales> <20111105201536.GB835@gonzales> <20111105233402.GA2831@gonzales> <20111106033146.GC2831@gonzales> <1320585372.5586.YahooMailRC@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1320600072.82050.YahooMailRC@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1320600072.82050.YahooMailRC@web81308.mail.mud.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 74.125.82.174 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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / John E Clifford, On 06/11/2011 17:21: > I am only mildly surprised that you claim that lionness is not a possible > meaning for {cinfo}, but the way that you state it fails to convince, since, in > (lo ka cinof na cinfo} you have set up a context in which lioness is set up in > opposition to whatever {cinfo} now means. This does not preclude {lo cinfo}, > for example, referring to lionness in an appropriate situation. If you hold > that no situation could be appropriate for that meaning, then I wonder a bit > about your commitment to blobularism or about what limits you have (unstatedly) > placed on the blob. In some ways, {lo cinfo} is to {lo ka ce'u cinfo} as {lo nu da cinfo} is to {lo du'u da cinfo}. The "lo" and "lo nu" exist in spacetime, and the "lo ka" and "lo du'u" don't. "lo'i ka" and "lo'i du'u" are singletons, and "lo'i (cinfo)" and "lo'i nu" aren't. -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.