Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:49730)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCIfp7ILVEBDp8p_2BBoEiKmeZQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RRpvV-0000nh-Px; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:46:16 -0800
Received: by pzk33 with SMTP id 33sf2754671pzk.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:46:03 -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=8pVsMqiALxKb9McnlGwciDQ+EqzUzlQj81T8A1627gU=;
        b=5/OEqOKZt30scy7OdIcw0E/R4XnGv0Q6tjnFC+oP2rZtFbbiOw9+VHGPtBZ3BlvhbV
         P3tZ93IQlkk8pC3UE5jUsagpRYFAqweQLZWt1ivQ/YWE/gwZGXxgoe4xGGdAB2tmLr4Z
         mS+pXjnSC6sK45eYQErNukreZnI3LnAcWF2L8=
Received: by 10.68.29.129 with SMTP id k1mr817711pbh.1.1321728361034;
        Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:46:01 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.11.197 with SMTP id s5ls3337289pbb.0.gmail; Sat, 19 Nov
 2011 10:46:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.15.41 with SMTP id u9mr11164625pbc.3.1321728360332;
        Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:46:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.15.41 with SMTP id u9mr11164622pbc.3.1321728360319;
        Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:46:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r5si10921682pbe.1.2011.11.19.10.46.00
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:46:00 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.44;
Received: by mail-pz0-f44.google.com with SMTP id 33so18516746pzk.3
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:46:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.44.230 with SMTP id h6mr20707628pbm.23.1321728360055; Sat,
 19 Nov 2011 10:46:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.58.194 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:45:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAOYwWb12=W2Ny6yp5buqOcEyVr-=uyMWyt-mb0P_Sk5MW1heMA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1321501066.64722.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.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>
	<CAOYwWb22v6nNUCpC2eF6m90UQyCg_sUxQpo3A2xQmdgdrtiT0Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKOEKkTu-hcznZD2-8Pm8WkxAw=PzohNmRi-c1=nVQ=XE2kY9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<1321640207.88557.YahooMailRC@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<CAOYwWb2ayxT+8C4Fk0LAqqW9uhQ4aak9O3dK4eh6TMcQy2DeSQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CC43076C-B83C-477A-9D68-1215644C2E28@yahoo.com>
	<4EC705DD.8060202@lojban.org>
	<CAOYwWb2dRrdN8XkMuNA_5LhQeoGPf5jdNgqf5cRbZj3HzeR9zg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EC79CEB.8000002@lojban.org>
	<CAOYwWb12=W2Ny6yp5buqOcEyVr-=uyMWyt-mb0P_Sk5MW1heMA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:45:59 -0300
Message-ID: <CALMa68rnc74omj9aOh9iUEzKb71mFjWuLGYSwE9yuxJT-aQgSw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Lions and levels and the like
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Felipe_Gon=E7alves_Assis?= <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: felipeg.assis@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.44 as permitted
 sender) smtp.mail=felipeg.assis@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: /

About the Capability vs Possibility question:

I think the word that is missing here is volition. "x1 is Capable of x2" sh=
ould
be read as "x1 will (do) x2 if he wants", implying volition per x1.

Possibility is an unrelated concept. My ability to go per se doesn't imply
anything about the possibility or necessity of my going. Conversely,
the possibility of my going doesn't imply anything about the control I
have over it.

The verb "can" in English may express Capability, Possibility, and
possibly other things:
  * "I can swim." -> I'll swim if I want.
  * "This can be the answer to our problems!" -> It is possible that it is.
  * "Hey! You cannot smoke in here!" -> It is not allowed.

{kakne} in lojban is more useful as denoting Capability than Possibility
with a highlighted subject.


About CAhA:
I also agree with the reasons given by xorxes for it not making sense
that this selma'o denote Capability. However, the documentation has
indeed, at least, largely drifted towards the Capability interpretation.

I strongly +1 the idea that something be done to give lojban clear
modal logic tags, either by rewriting the CAhA documentation or by
devising experimental cmavo, not because I like changes, but because
this is too good a reason for one.


About selbri:
Till now, the only gismu I recognize as fit to express modal aspects is {cu=
mki}.


meta:
Shouldn't we branch this modal discussion to another thread?

mu'o mi'e .asiz.

On 19 November 2011 12:22, maikxlx <maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Bob LeChevalier, President and
> Founder - LLG <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>> maikxlx wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Bob LeChevalier, President and
>>> Founder - LLG <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If I make a ka'e capability claim involving all the places of klama, t=
hen
>>>> the claim applies just as much to the place gone to as to the go-er. =
=A0If
>>>> I
>>>> can go to a place (from somewhere else by some route), then that place
>>>> can
>>>> 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. =A0Specifically the capacit=
y
>>> 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.
>>
>> But of course the capability of lo klama to be such is the capability to
>> klama x2 x3 x4 x5, and its capability is dependent on the values of x2, =
x3,
>> x4, and x5, and correspondingly, the claim seems evident that this is
>> strongly associated with the capability of that x2 to se klama x1 x3 x4 =
x5,
>> and with the capability of x3 to te klama x2 x1 x4 x5, etc.
>>
> I agree that there is a family of co-dependent capabilities. =A0The rub
> in the context of the larger discussion is the exact relationship of
> this family to {cumki}. =A0Supposing for a moment that it could be
> purified of obvious malrarna, I would still say that {kakne} makes a
> stronger claim than {cumki} does, because the former imputes to an
> individual in the actual world an inherent property, whereas the
> latter merely claims that the overall proposition is possible, or to
> put it equivalently, that it is true in some possible state of
> affairs. =A0What we want out of {ka'e} is only the latter, and if it
> can't guarantee that, then something else is needed IMHO.
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Bob LeChevalier, President and
> Founder - LLG <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>> I think Plan B was =A0whimsical sketch on purpose, intending to make fun=
 of
>> the perfectionists who were perpetually proposing something new and
>> different to reform the language.
>>
> I don't know. =A0It was written in a pretty deadpan tone.
>
>> My insight, such as it was, is that for a language to be a LANGUAGE, the
>> significance of a stable and active user base is all important. =A0A
>> theoretical construct that no one (or only the inventor) uses might be m=
ore
>> logical, but it would not really be a language. =A0I did not win friends=
 in
>> the conlang community with this attitude %^)
>> --
> Well, even as a "perfectionist" that might disagree with you, I'd say
> you must have done something right, because the fact of the matter is
> that Lojban is the only game in town.
>
>> Bob LeChevalier =A0 =A0lojbab@lojban.org =A0 =A0www.lojban.org
>> President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
>
> mu'o mi'e .maik.
>
> --
> 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@googlegr=
oups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb=
an?hl=3Den.
>
>

--=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.