Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]:36498) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RNTCD-0007ju-Kk; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:31 -0800 Received: by gyg4 with SMTP id 4sf6191650gyg.16 for ; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-yahoo-newman-property:x-yahoo-newman-id :x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references:message-id:date:from:subject:to :in-reply-to:mime-version: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=sHUR2cuSZ1P5A8GplATiOsCRnMLlHc+2cM5rfSho/bE=; b=l3zle0M0lxpO/cG7uoGsjG+DW8NCpYtUajwaNUYSs4pzYpQc28Kqrwtp0L5I2YvBJm RacmCyxGImCNeAxnWXuc/CXxhegaHO34H61AyrczrQXVXMH9+rDXHug3WA9/CB9ulUfp qhlGSo4yKIEvkggG7uuDrPzJs4Z/wAPU13i4k= Received: by 10.236.201.227 with SMTP id b63mr7383709yho.6.1320687672494; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:12 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.100.237.8 with SMTP id k8ls12230042anh.2.gmail; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.101.90.1 with SMTP id s1mr6854652anl.9.1320687670989; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.101.90.1 with SMTP id s1mr6854651anl.9.1320687670958; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from nm22-vm1.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm22-vm1.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com. [66.94.236.140]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id g4si11789532anh.0.2011.11.07.09.41.10; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:10 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.140 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.236.140; Received: from [66.94.237.196] by nm22.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Nov 2011 17:41:10 -0000 Received: from [66.94.237.100] by tm7.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Nov 2011 17:41:10 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1005.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Nov 2011 17:41:10 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-5 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 672798.18419.bm@omp1005.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 92770 invoked by uid 60001); 7 Nov 2011 17:41:10 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: x8QKngAVM1nxOuTmHliBDEJajXi7a._4F2uty8N7vAVD3FO IkGKQrCegHCE.NSlI_e7YkyVPkG3jhNTu4h4TDyC5.86mILTq54eWDYunHNd iHPNR7K_bZfwgbQfUqfvbIpBIaqi6x8S7iYoRfeehLWfcOITUCq3PDiuGQii xIq3bGTCNRIxlrNgs0sW5cymRwO.S3M8wpotqsS0CdSA4nJ.7xNTd2Dajv9Y PNjWR8aJApD5uPCUC4Nl2l4uEDxBlc76tEET.mhtBxgkEeYRz9AtcpNC92JS Zy0fPqu16_eAdqfHVnkClD1aEx1ISNQf.bHFOvJ54whoF2Th5l.MHdkPwrf6 wmwGLWC1N8BXODAPa62w3h1wlSr_..sqBJ7DuiFuZI5CHxcDAr6A_Ax4uEnw LB6L9UKCLOMDL8ppIzxdOdQhjQoJh03wkYJYNwrBNJtD0nc0vu9qkMGycQj4 DrUvyOzJTr7dczQ-- Received: from [99.92.108.41] by web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:41:10 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/574 YahooMailWebService/0.8.114.317681 References: <4EAC5B24.4000604@gmail.com> <20111103234955.GA3758@gonzales> <4EB43035.6040407@gmail.com> <20111104233756.GB24058@gonzales> <4EB4A123.7030305@gmail.com> <20111105061247.GE24058@gonzales> <4EB526B7.7070008@gmail.com> <20111105172216.GI24058@gonzales> <1320680539.36060.YahooMailRC@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20111107171940.GB2718@gonzales> Message-ID: <1320687670.89969.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 09:41:10 -0800 (PST) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: <20111107171940.GB2718@gonzales> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.140 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.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 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / I'm still not sure I follow this problem. In general the inference does not hold, of course, and the process by which it is made to appear to hold seems to involve changing the meaning of terms in mid stream, so that quantifiers that made sense in one case make no (or certainly not the same) sense in the other. They seem (stressed) to be consistent about the level on the same word in the same context, though the level may be one where the official definition seems to have little relevance. ----- Original Message ---- From: Martin Bays To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Mon, November 7, 2011 11:19:40 AM Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable * Monday, 2011-11-07 at 07:42 -0800 - John E Clifford : > Why is there only one level in Ready-Made? I suspect that this is a straw man > you have set up, but the characterization of it -- and of blobular -- are so > vague as to make a clear judgement difficult. I suspect that the only problem > with levels is just that {lo broda cu klesi lo broda} shouldn't hold. Or that, > > in the same context, {broda} is used sometimes for avatars (exemplars, slices, > ordinary things) and sometimes for kinds/masses/properties. MB seems to be > saying that you do do this, but his evidence is somewhat confusing itself >(using > > quantifiers inappropriately, for example), so I am not sure you do (or don't, > for that matter). I do think, however, that there are limits as to how far up > or don you can shove a predicate without some indication of the shove, but I am > > less sure what those limits are (using {cinfo} for what would normally be {ka > cinfo}, something about functions from worlds to sets, for example, seems to >far > > up, using it for muscle fiber from a lion's leg muscle seems too far down -- >but > > I am open to arguments either way). I proposing a simple test/definition of when level-mixing has gone too far: A unary broda is Sloppy if, in any domain containing everything which can broda, for any brode and brodi, {brode ro brodi su'o broda} implies {se brode su'o broda ro brodi} (Technical restriction: brode can not be taken to be {du}, because that has to be considered to be magic for the domain not to collapse. {mintu} and {dunli} are fine, though). If I understand xorxes and and correctly, they have every predicate being Sloppy - the witness for the existential in the second sentence can be taken to be the kind of broda which is broded by some brodi. They try to dodge this problem by introducing informal rules to avoid level-mixing within a single domain - in particular, they would never consider a domain like those in the definition of Sloppy. Martin -- 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.