Received: from mail-vb0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]:58093)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCNXflom_FxD8icqBBRoE-UmgKg@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1T3WvT-0007ds-Dd; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:16 -0700
Received: by vbzb23 with SMTP id b23sf6659617vbz.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:04 -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;
        bh=q1NQRpcNQ08+N4KoScjGRE3wyv8M5jKReqLU2GBmqco=;
        b=XZEGHEW1yC6lpduyZq/ftOAtSe4qnT5LKae/eEt0Cp7Bv52DcAxbbY9niUFYG/iMcH
         qrVXfY/VQNhzmjqORjFY7QcwV4A9UjKYmA/cqoOcjmsMDY0Bq53sNcAzJUQg/jPbPUXg
         WS1cjyl2y6Y7gwgKnx6a5CnlUgEvq7sLUFj48=
Received: by 10.68.129.69 with SMTP id nu5mr2211371pbb.17.1345488124128;
        Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.210.197 with SMTP id mw5ls10010263pbc.7.gmail; Mon, 20 Aug
 2012 11:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.66.72.73 with SMTP id b9mr1998683pav.9.1345488123410;
        Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.66.72.73 with SMTP id b9mr1998682pav.9.1345488123396;
        Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f43.google.com (mail-pz0-f43.google.com [209.85.210.43])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p7si549169pby.0.2012.08.20.11.42.03
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of maikxlx@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.43;
Received: by daku36 with SMTP id u36so2285460dak.2
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.84.163 with SMTP id a3mr28303374paz.61.1345488123008; Mon,
 20 Aug 2012 11:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.213.67 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:42:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1345484290.78050.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <4eae7ab1-572f-44cc-a260-a78b3bf93a9c@googlegroups.com>
	<CAOYwWb2LM14PvWQobERsnM6iZc3zkCVDo0sBqJGR+vo6wosQCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1345484290.78050.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:42:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOYwWb2uy4tUOpkZZdihcomW+9AWJtPRhSMvMgAo_Hh1-bg5Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Cowan's summary: opacity and sumti-raising
From: "Mike S." <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 209.85.210.43 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=maikxlx@gmail.com; dkim=pass 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:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d042dffed9f15ce04c7b6dd65
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

--f46d042dffed9f15ce04c7b6dd65
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:38 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>wrote:

> If my memory serves, running seems the best idea.  It now appears that the
> previous thread apparently about {ro} and "any" was actually about the
> (apparently) odd behavior of quantifiers in the proximity to intensional
> contexts and so there is probably a double issue at hand.
> {do djicu le nu do citka ma} is a real world question embedded in an
> transworld context, so its answer turns out to reflect both its
> antecedents, with the issue being (at least partly) just where the
> quantifier goes in the the whole dialogue scheme.  To this there are many
> answers, none of them totally satisfactory nor generally agreed to, so a
> long storm is likely.  But I am (after all these years) a pessimist, so
> stick around for at least a while and see if something useful doesn't turn
> up.
>

IMHO only a careful and thorough formalization that posits exactly _one_
semantic interpretation rule for _each_ syntactic operation has the chance
to clear up such issues once and for all.  Such a formalization wouldn't
have to be like Montague's program in all the exact details, but it would
have to be something much like it in terms of degree of rigor.

In the meantime I'll stick around and even chime in from time to time.

-- 
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.


--f46d042dffed9f15ce04c7b6dd65
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:38 PM, John E Clif=
ford <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:kali9putra@yahoo.com" target=
=3D"_blank">kali9putra@yahoo.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex">
<div><div style=3D"font-size:12pt;font-family:times new roman,new york,time=
s,serif"><div><span>If my memory serves, running seems the best idea.=A0 It=
 now appears that the previous thread apparently about {ro} and &quot;any&q=
uot; was actually about the (apparently) odd behavior of quantifiers in the=
 proximity to intensional contexts and so there is probably a double issue =
at hand.=A0 <br>
</span></div><div><span>{do djicu le nu do citka ma} is a real world questi=
on embedded in an transworld context, so its answer turns out to reflect bo=
th its antecedents, with the issue being (at least partly) just where the q=
uantifier goes in the the whole dialogue scheme.=A0 To this there are many =
answers, none of them totally satisfactory nor generally agreed to, so a lo=
ng storm is likely.=A0 But I am (after all these years) a pessimist, so sti=
ck around for at least a while and see if something useful doesn&#39;t turn
 up.</span><br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br>
IMHO only a careful and thorough formalization that posits exactly _one_ se=
mantic interpretation rule for=20
_each_ syntactic operation has the chance to clear up such issues once and =
for all.=A0 Such a formalization wouldn&#39;t have to be like Montague&#39;=
s=20
program=20
in all the exact details, but it would have to be something much like it in=
 terms of degree of rigor.<br>
<br>
In the meantime I&#39;ll stick around and even chime in from time to time.<=
br><br><br><br>=A0</div></div><br>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.<br />



--f46d042dffed9f15ce04c7b6dd65--