Received: from mail-vx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.220.189]:45451)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCNXflom_FxChwJz2BBoEcQUo5Q@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RRbSM-0003x6-Gp; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:19:14 -0800
Received: by vcbfk1 with SMTP id fk1sf4538481vcb.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:18:59 -0800 (PST)
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=+wdMirTC7He/O2OacTJ5/B6QILuBrjWmMbqh6kfHDgk=;
        b=vV3I24dxRmHrMlSuZZ6+oXC/unKP5vWCSQHY5CTZ7qte58DMchQbCk/Sk9rgYTCtYE
         /7n2o6CESakTdsgOpa3DeEgGPU1ZVLiU8WDLtiXxfioYugUd3o9tzRXAZc2i/RYGaQIv
         KGBrtXfd6+lBkBvit25ITcj+Bt30ld8v+/mx4=
Received: by 10.52.20.73 with SMTP id l9mr2644278vde.15.1321672737235;
        Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:18:57 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.101.55.11 with SMTP id h11ls6818291ank.4.gmail; Fri, 18 Nov
 2011 19:18:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.236.170.198 with SMTP id p46mr9361402yhl.8.1321672736436;
        Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:18:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.236.170.198 with SMTP id p46mr9361401yhl.8.1321672736421;
        Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:18:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gx0-f176.google.com (mail-gx0-f176.google.com [209.85.161.176])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r1si856389yhb.5.2011.11.18.19.18.56
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:18:56 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of maikxlx@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.176;
Received: by ggnp1 with SMTP id p1so3621344ggn.7
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:18:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.38.41 with SMTP id d9mr9809049pbk.103.1321672736122; Fri,
 18 Nov 2011 19:18:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.142.224.8 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:18:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4EC702E8.1000004@lojban.org>
References: <1321501066.64722.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<CAOYwWb10sDFZMfj8PDLJcs4=PNfKidsxFs6-7oJL2XKMycBSBA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2eVLOEVpdO9rWE+FF8RRpVud_KcXQWFBgde834FTQRQow@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYwWb0qongWuyfY6CbA3T37ie+-ZLGy0C8oj5-L8X-7aPBD_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2dq-fjM_p6+pRqWb98mT+GL6rq8iiqmpbWP8rAphBZt_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYwWb0TtO0rQ15PKUgYRd1rAhC-kS6rErryD4E3q9-xsL35uQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2fis_iTSBPqqbyPRX28jukOcWDdvau5w6PMDa3otLROHA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYwWb2ZFLsKEhPffjO=QSGsj1c9oYeb9=femhFpO=JOAeeywQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2droqa-EGbekEK=Z-t+3C2AF0OSXKi7+87Fm3DQn_VJxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYwWb3W=Fg08oPKgLPmwY7rvVdBfGY-RgWVVRQ0MXcF2k0brw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1321633769.30584.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<4EC702E8.1000004@lojban.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 22:18:55 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOYwWb025Nh6vJD12j=iZGqzv2NEu=nrASk2wVUt4KTo_rwDgA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Lions and levels and the like
From: maikxlx <maikxlx@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: maikxlx@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of maikxlx@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.176 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=maikxlx@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 Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Bob LeChevalier, President and
Founder - LLG <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>>>> Also, while {cumki} does express possibility, {ka'e}, from the given
>>>> definitions, seems to be more about ability than possibility.
>>>
>>> But whose ability? Each of the arguments of the relation modified by
>>> "ka'e"? The x1? The agent (assuming there is one)?
>>
>> You're asking me?! =A0Well since you asked, from what I see, I would
>> definitely assume the x1, given the glosses, proposed keywords, and
>> examples in the CLL and BPFK.
>
> That was the intent (or rather the "subject" rather than x1, since you co=
uld
> access the x2 with "se brivla" etc), though I admit that I didn't and sti=
ll
> don't really understand why it couldn't apply to one of the other places.
>
> If I make a ka'e capability claim involving all the places of klama, then
> the claim applies just as much to the place gone to as to the go-er. =A0I=
f I
> can go to a place (from somewhere else by some route), then that place ca=
n
> be gone to by me, and likewise, if I cannot, then it cannot.
>
I have to disagree; I think that {kakne} capability manifests itself
differently among each of the bridi places.  Specifically the capacity
of a goer to be a goer is expressible as something like {lo ka ka'e
klama}, while the capacity to be a place gone-to is {lo ka ka'e se
klama} -- assuming that {ka'e} carries from {kakne}, which is
something that xorxes disputes.


>>>> In
>>>> order to say things like "it possibly brodas" and "it necessarily
>>>> brodas" I have to believe that these concepts should have their own
>>>> words, without mixing ability into it.
>>>
>>> I agree that the word "ability" should not appear in the definition of
>>> CAhAs, since events don't really have abilities.
>>
>> It's not just "ability" that seems off, it's also the ambiguous "can"
>> and "innate capability" as well as the conspicuous absence of "may",
>> "might" and above all "POSSIBLE".
>
> "possible" (cumki) seems to ONLY be about events, whereas I thought ka'e =
and
> CAhA was more about the sumti that participate in the events. =A0Maybe th=
ere
> isn't a lot of difference, though.
>
I agree with you here about {cumki} and {kakne}.  In ordinary
conversation, often the difference is not great, as the non-existence
of purely modal-logical operators in Lojban up until now would seem to
prove.   But from a logical point of view, the difference is rather
important.


> Or maybe pc and I understood at the time that necessity was not something
> covered in CAhA, (since I am pretty sure he has *at least* a "foggiest
> notion".)
>
Sounds like someone has some 'splainin to do.

mu'o mi'e .maik.

--=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.