Received: from mail-bk0-f61.google.com ([209.85.214.61]:34764)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCL3SuIvlExCcovWBBRoE-CCVLQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1T6V0e-0005th-Qi; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:15:59 -0700
Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4sf2097638bkw.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:15:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-authenticated:x-provags-id:message-id
         :date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to
         :x-y-gmx-trusted: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=3GgdYtbUoA2op3hZKtDXastzvZcpFSIlgtfD9EeaA24=;
        b=Wc2OsITTFHPz7e2U+T7u1tY4kLtwp4LeDyvh2q+W/KRC34bIWDS76xoMqPLafmVd0K
         jJXrgP0G/krlHHwlfLzWclPUA3x3F9oLy4eRfQygQiRnzPEfySkMDYhwo7U5iE01Btg5
         uL0uOkFpmls25H73xw7O2kHerPHY+qLUXsP86uUFTLwd4iQrL67jGUX+Kxz9OccuKssE
         6x2rGYHGaOMUK0KILePS2U9kljkZgkTdomgsxiWE4MV7QIUOp6WQfOK7qNeiSE1tNC5u
         HLLg49U9KvfxdVWqGkVftK5MaSx0JceUVlb/23ex4wOt17gBR9eoAtUt7zYXfimOLCR3
         NhqQ==
Received: by 10.180.87.229 with SMTP id bb5mr1924065wib.0.1346195740863;
        Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.180.79.101 with SMTP id i5ls6296547wix.2.canary; Tue, 28 Aug
 2012 16:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.82.226 with SMTP id l2mr2676126wiy.1.1346195740306;
        Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.82.226 with SMTP id l2mr2676125wiy.1.1346195740288;
        Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net. [213.165.64.22])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id hm1si913990wib.3.2012.08.28.16.15.40;
        Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:15:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.22 as permitted sender) client-ip=213.165.64.22;
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Aug 2012 23:15:39 -0000
Received: from p57A08C7E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.33]) [87.160.140.126]
  by mail.gmx.net (mp036) with SMTP; 29 Aug 2012 01:15:39 +0200
X-Authenticated: #54293076
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18diDNr9lMdhJiaUp9aFSJAPWyESBMH5Tsu6jVmkr
	b+8CaDCcOHG4o/
Message-ID: <503D5119.9020702@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 01:15:37 +0200
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] "Any" and {ro}
References: <44e6fb5c-91f3-47ba-817c-8560c9c6ca14@googlegroups.com> <502B9E61.8060808@gmx.de> <aa901417-c099-410c-a41a-61cca53dbc81@googlegroups.com> <502BA634.3030007@gmx.de> <CAPAJj9+DbXzr2xW3ZTLaY=+wtEQ4r-M-WfHKLxKvj=VLiLdfHw@mail.gmail.com> <502C50EB.3090704@gmail.com> <7e604d79-8ecd-4690-bc39-bf48b601d46f@googlegroups.com> <5036D423.5050101@gmail.com> <c823d5bd-eb00-448d-92b8-5e9703392eca@googlegroups.com> <5038CEC3.4050708@gmail.com> <c3a1363a-5094-4633-86c0-38c6c383665f@googlegroups.com> <5039204B.1060401@gmail.com> <325f818f-76ce-4f3c-b0c0-03dc4db2e9d8@googlegroups.com> <503B8ED4.200@gmail.com> <f9e39122-b072-4aa4-8aab-86657bcaebb0@googlegroups.com> <9019D4E1-8993-4AF4-BD70-AC76E5A9620F@yahoo.com> <eeef465e-467b-428e-9d7b-f95baf39ee8c@googlegroups.com> <1346161778.18681.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <b3dff172-ec6d-4f8d-affd-9ef8c0f238f0@googlegroups.com> <CAOQ8VDWAKZy5iUbzvrTgkbprVWAhG5Qj0FR9rTCk=JRdGjAxpA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ8VDWAKZy5iUbzvrTgkbprVWAhG5Qj0FR9rTCk=JRdGjAxpA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-Original-Sender: seladwa@gmx.de
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.22 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=seladwa@gmx.de
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="------------080802080209090808010907"
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------080802080209090808010907
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Am 29.08.2012 00:52, schrieb Jacob Errington:
>
>
> On 28 August 2012 12:39, la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com 
> <mailto:gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     OK. Please everyone translate the following sentences.
>     1. "I'm gonna eat three apples from that basket" [some specific
>     apples, namely the red one. the yellow one and the green one but
>     I'm too lazy to mention it]
>     2. "I'm gonna eat any three apples from that basket"
>     3. "Give me any three apples from the basket"
>     4. "Give me three apples from the basket" [not known whether I
>     need some specific apples or not]
>
>
> gleki,  Lojban doesn't really distinguish this. What real information 
> is being conveyed that is so important by that addition of "any"?
> There are n apples in the basket. You tell someone you're going to eat 
> three. They expect that at some time in the future, after you've eaten 
> them, that there will be n-3 apples. That's it. If the listener 
> *cares* about which apples you're planning on eating, they'll *ask*. 
> The distinction is unnecessary, as evidenced in selpa'i's reply, i.e. 
> the one you thought was a joke.
>
> .i mi citka ci lo plise
> I'm going to eat three apples.
>
> Whether those apples are specific or not isn't really important, and 
> thus isn't specified.

But this doesn't say which three apples you are going to eat, and it 
does so explicitly. The outer quantifier gives you unspecific referents.

> This is a lot like tense, in Lojban. Specifying tense can become 
> superfluous in the same way that specificity can too.
>
> However, I do agree, there are few ways to incorporate specificity 
> into determining lojban referent sets. In my opinion, {lo} is 
> unspecific as to specificity, which makes it the all-purpose article. 
> I personally dislike {le}, but I don't think that it should disappear 
> because it does form the only way to really be specific. {lo} can be 
> as specific as {le}, but {le} should always be specific. In that 
> sense, {le} just represents a special case of {lo}, namely when the 
> referents are desired to be marked as explicitly specific.
>
> {.i mi citka ci le plise pe lo lanka}
> I'm going to eat three specific apples from the basket.

Same problem as before, the apples are not specific, because you used an 
outer quantifier. This sentence would mean "I will eat three of the 
apples I have in mind", which helps you very little.

> {.i mi citka ci lo plise pe lo lanka}
> I'm going to eat three apples, maybe particular ones, maybe random 
> ones, from the basket.

Again, the three apples are explicitly unspecific. Any three apples you 
eat will make this true.

> {.i mi citka ci lo ro da poi plise gi'e se lanka ta
> I'm going to eat three unspecific apples from that basket.

Okay.

The problem is that even though you call it "specific" in the gloss, the 
listener has no idea what referents you have in mind. "le" doesn't help 
you at all to convey to the listener which apples you want. The only way 
to do that is to either point at them, or describe them otherwise, for 
instance, you could say "lo plise poi zunle traji" or something, which 
is much more specific than "le plise pe lo lanka".

> I elected to use {ci lo ro da poi broda} because simple {.i ci da poi 
> plise gi'e se lanka ta zo'u mi citka da} says that there are exactly 
> three things in the universe that are apples and are in the basket, 
> and that I'm going to eat all three of them.

It says there are three things that are apples and are in the basket 
that you will eat, which is true with or without prenex.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

-- 
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo

^:i \jl /flr sen |ziu \su xn go kror
^:i \sym tfn /zu viw \xn jy ^jaiw

-- 
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.


--------------080802080209090808010907
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><tt>Am 29.08.2012 00:52, schrieb Jacob
        Errington:<br>
      </tt></div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAOQ8VDWAKZy5iUbzvrTgkbprVWAhG5Qj0FR9rTCk=JRdGjAxpA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite"><tt><br>
        <br>
      </tt>
      <div class="gmail_quote"><tt>On 28 August 2012 12:39, la gleki <span
            dir="ltr">&lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com" target="_blank">gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span>
          wrote:<br>
        </tt>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
          .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
          <div><tt>OK. Please everyone translate the following
              sentences.</tt></div>
          <div><tt>1. "I'm gonna eat three apples from that basket"
              [some specific apples, namely the red one. the yellow one
              and the green one but I'm too lazy to mention it]</tt></div>
          <div><tt>2. "I'm gonna eat any three apples from that basket"</tt></div>
          <div><tt>3. "Give me any three apples from the basket"</tt></div>
          <div><tt>4. "Give me three apples from the basket" [not known
              whether I need some specific apples or not]</tt></div>
          <div><tt><br>
            </tt></div>
        </blockquote>
        <div><tt><br>
          </tt></div>
        <div><tt>gleki, &nbsp;Lojban doesn't really distinguish this. What
            real information is being conveyed that is so important by
            that addition of "any"?&nbsp;</tt></div>
        <div><tt>There are n apples in the basket. You tell someone
            you're going to eat three. They expect that at some time in
            the future, after you've eaten them, that there will be n-3
            apples. That's it. If the listener *cares* about which
            apples you're planning on eating, they'll *ask*. The
            distinction is unnecessary, as evidenced in selpa'i's reply,
            i.e. the one you thought was a joke.</tt></div>
        <div><tt><br>
          </tt></div>
        <div><tt>.i mi citka ci lo plise</tt></div>
        <div><tt>I'm going to eat three apples.&nbsp;</tt></div>
        <div><tt><br>
          </tt></div>
        <div><tt>Whether those apples are specific or not isn't really
            important, and thus isn't specified. </tt></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
      But this doesn't say which three apples you are going to eat, and
      it does so explicitly. The outer quantifier gives you unspecific
      referents.<br>
      <br>
    </tt>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAOQ8VDWAKZy5iUbzvrTgkbprVWAhG5Qj0FR9rTCk=JRdGjAxpA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div><tt>This is a lot like tense, in Lojban. Specifying tense
            can become superfluous in the same way that specificity can
            too.</tt></div>
        <div><tt><br>
          </tt></div>
        <div><tt>However, I do agree, there are few ways to incorporate
            specificity into determining lojban referent sets. In my
            opinion, {lo} is unspecific as to specificity, which makes
            it the all-purpose article. I personally dislike {le}, but I
            don't think that it should disappear because it does form
            the only way to really be specific. {lo} can be as specific
            as {le}, but {le} should always be specific. In that sense,
            {le} just represents a special case of {lo}, namely when the
            referents are desired to be marked as explicitly specific.</tt></div>
        <div><tt><br>
          </tt></div>
        <div><tt>{.i mi citka ci le plise pe lo lanka}</tt></div>
        <div><tt>I'm going to eat three specific apples from the basket.</tt></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
      Same problem as before, the apples are not specific, because you
      used an outer quantifier. This sentence would mean "I will eat
      three of the apples I have in mind", which helps you very little.
      <br>
      <br>
    </tt>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAOQ8VDWAKZy5iUbzvrTgkbprVWAhG5Qj0FR9rTCk=JRdGjAxpA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div><tt>{.i mi citka ci lo plise pe lo lanka}</tt></div>
        <div><tt>I'm going to eat three apples, maybe particular ones,
            maybe random ones, from the basket.</tt></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
      Again, the three apples are explicitly unspecific. Any three
      apples you eat will make this true.<br>
      <br>
    </tt>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAOQ8VDWAKZy5iUbzvrTgkbprVWAhG5Qj0FR9rTCk=JRdGjAxpA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div><tt>{.i mi citka ci lo ro da poi plise gi'e se lanka ta</tt></div>
        <div><tt>I'm going to eat three unspecific apples from that
            basket.</tt></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
      Okay.<br>
      <br>
      The problem is that even though you call it "specific" in the
      gloss, the listener has no idea what referents you have in mind.
      "le" doesn't help you at all to convey to the listener which
      apples you want. The only way to do that is to either point at
      them, or describe them otherwise, for instance, you could say "lo
      plise poi zunle traji" or something, which is much more specific
      than "le plise pe lo lanka".<br>
      <br>
    </tt>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAOQ8VDWAKZy5iUbzvrTgkbprVWAhG5Qj0FR9rTCk=JRdGjAxpA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div><tt>I elected to use {ci lo ro da poi broda} because simple
            {.i ci da poi plise gi'e se lanka ta zo'u mi citka da} says
            that there are exactly three things in the universe that are
            apples and are in the basket, and that I'm going to eat all
            three of them.</tt></div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
      It says there are three things that are apples and are in the
      basket that you will eat, which is true with or without prenex.<br>
      <br>
      mu'o mi'e la selpa'i<br>
    </tt>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72"><tt>-- 
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo

^:i \jl /flr sen |ziu \su xn go kror
^:i \sym tfn /zu viw \xn jy ^jaiw</tt></pre>
  </body>
</html>

<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@googlegroups.com.<br />

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



--------------080802080209090808010907--