Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61]:58901)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCKOXn8wTEMTRhoIFGgTM9ZaU@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1T7h2h-0003uM-2T; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:19:02 -0700
Received: by yhoo21 with SMTP id o21sf3205635yho.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject
         :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=QdRMF8pjgTJZBQx2BXvTy2aTqDpLP762QBiQEuLr5D8=;
        b=zY39VXrN3i3wn+D4sNhBkkbDZHDxACiY1wnmS27fnbBcEk7wOJs0Gozh0KxQxItKOg
         GE6z0JdB9ysIrHugfK+ICsfm/Rm61e6BjOglgpeGWT4JDnn3t/MAcCaEcOZHC6nbollP
         3f9Y+bl9MtqyE6OdedqbobTL1YsP27RUdW1BEsmgn6LZuqfJ4A06R13TnM8D8bVVC4nw
         CrGK1XBKiqcpqg2GfEyRh2R5u3FDb1WUad+J5/NiTDngmia9WR5w/ZXZCdpdBjfq9njE
         uzXkZZbq1hjnvdxBWCe0fXvL7CpRrOp/6gUelheshmHfhtK1IJqVtGP42ywAo+GYReGw
         uyXg==
Received: by 10.236.87.71 with SMTP id x47mr1029930yhe.6.1346480324332;
        Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.236.120.244 with SMTP id p80ls5860488yhh.0.gmail; Fri, 31 Aug
 2012 23:18:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.185.98 with SMTP id t62mr1015397yhm.7.1346480323745;
        Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:18:43 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:18:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <a9b545df-c659-4b65-9817-566b092aba15@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <504112FA.4010001@gmail.com>
References: <e09a669e-9fdd-47c1-968a-014ec72e933e@googlegroups.com> <502A81EB.2000005@gmail.com> <fbfa4089-61e9-4b2a-b858-8ec8b42f85bd@googlegroups.com> <502A9A2C.20606@gmail.com> <55e70b7d-e835-423b-8557-8ae88b88a4e2@googlegroups.com>
 <504112FA.4010001@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Revising mu'ei and CAhA once again. Possible worlds.
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of
 gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates internal as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@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="----=_Part_2258_16802486.1346480322691"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_2258_16802486.1346480322691
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1



On Friday, August 31, 2012 11:39:43 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote:
>
> la gleki, On 31/08/2012 17:48: 
> > On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:34:20 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote: 
> > 
> >     Gleki Arxokuna, On 14/08/2012 18:23: 
> >      > I wish Robin started using {mu'ei} again but 
> >      > it's really when usage decides. May be human brain just doesn't 
> want 
> >      > to deal with A-level at such level of precision. May be {ka'e/na 
> >      > ka'e/ka'ei/bia'i} or even {bi'ai} is enough. 
> > 
> >     The evidence of natural language is to the contrary. The 
> could/probably/would contrast is the some/most/all contrast. 
> > 
> >      > The use of {da'i} is interesting. For a logical language it's 
> >      > completely deplorable, because there's a complete mismatch 
> between 
> >      > the lexicosyntactic form and the logical form, and no explicit 
> rule 
> >      > about how to get from one to the other -- it works by mere 
> stipulated 
> >      > magic. But it caught on among those impatient to be actively 
> using 
> >      > the language, and nicely illustrated the fundamental 
> incompatibility 
> >      > between a loglang and a language governed by the principle of 
> "let 
> >      > usage decide". 
> >      > 
> >      > May be we can determine the most common usage of {da'i} and 
> redefine 
> >      > it from the point of view of A/M/F-level scheme? May be we should 
> >      > perform analysis of Lojban corpus and tatoeba sentences? 
> > 
> >     {da'i} is in UI, isn't it? So it doesn't have the right grammatical 
> properties. 
> > 
> > It is in UI. If I "discovered" A and F levels why not bind {da'i} to 
> A-level i.e. make it a synonym of {ka'e} but without changing the grammar 
> and selmaho 
> > and {da'inai} would be "equal" to {ca'a}. 
>
> Because {da'i} should be a marker of mood -- of hypothetical, unassertive 
> mood; whereas, ka'e is a modal of possibility. Modals involve 
> quantification over possible states of affairs of various sorts.


I don't see much difference. Who counts over possible worlds? The speaker. 
Does {romu'ei} mean really every possible world? I think it refers to all 
the possible worlds that the speaker has in mind.
{da'i} doesn't count possible worlds but instead refers to their existence. 
May be it's not {ka'e} but {ka'ei=su'opame'iromu'ei}.
Next. Robin said that cumki and Ko could work in this field too. Then why 
not use {da'i} together with {ju'o, la'a} to describe those possible worlds?

I just can see the lack of a scheme. A-level is now more or less described 
with {mu'ei}.
la xorxes was able to describe {nu'o,pu'i} as derivations of mu'ei and ca'a 
if ca'a describes F-level.

Now I have questions about {cumki, lakne, kanpe} and {ju'o,la'a,ba'a}, 
{da'i} and probably {sruma/ru'a}, how they are related to A- and F-levels.
 

> Moods involve a relation between the speaker and the proposition -- the 
> speaker asserts p to be true, the speaker wishes p were true, the speaker 
> entertains the idea of p, the speaker asks whether p is true, and so forth. 
>
> (There's no harm in marking the protasis and/or apodosis of a conditional 
> with da'i, but da'i doesn't generate conditional semantics.) 
>
> --And. 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/lHhh6zKj44AJ.
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.


------=_Part_2258_16802486.1346480322691
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Friday, August 31, 2012 11:39:43 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote:<bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-l=
eft: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">la gleki, On 31/08/2012 17:48:
<br>&gt; On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:34:20 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote:
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; Gleki Arxokuna, On 14/08/2012 18:23:
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; I wish Robin started using {mu'ei} again =
but
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; it's really when usage decides. May be hu=
man brain just doesn't want
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; to deal with A-level at such level of pre=
cision. May be {ka'e/na
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; ka'e/ka'ei/bia'i} or even {bi'ai} is enou=
gh.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; The evidence of natural language is to the contrary.=
 The could/probably/would contrast is the some/most/all contrast.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; The use of {da'i} is interesting. For a l=
ogical language it's
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; completely deplorable, because there's a =
complete mismatch between
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; the lexicosyntactic form and the logical =
form, and no explicit rule
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; about how to get from one to the other --=
 it works by mere stipulated
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; magic. But it caught on among those impat=
ient to be actively using
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; the language, and nicely illustrated the =
fundamental incompatibility
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; between a loglang and a language governed=
 by the principle of "let
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; usage decide".
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; May be we can determine the most common u=
sage of {da'i} and redefine
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; it from the point of view of A/M/F-level =
scheme? May be we should
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&gt; perform analysis of Lojban corpus and tat=
oeba sentences?
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; {da'i} is in UI, isn't it? So it doesn't have the ri=
ght grammatical properties.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; It is in UI. If I "discovered" A and F levels why not bind {da'i} =
to A-level i.e. make it a synonym of {ka'e} but without changing the gramma=
r and selmaho
<br>&gt; and {da'inai} would be "equal" to {ca'a}.
<br>
<br>Because {da'i} should be a marker of mood -- of hypothetical, unasserti=
ve mood; whereas, ka'e is a modal of possibility. Modals involve quantifica=
tion over possible states of affairs of various sorts.</blockquote><div><br=
></div><div>I don't see much difference. Who counts over possible worlds? T=
he speaker. Does {romu'ei} mean really every possible world? I think it ref=
ers to all the possible worlds that the speaker has in mind.</div><div>{da'=
i} doesn't count possible worlds but instead refers to their existence. May=
 be it's not {ka'e} but {ka'ei=3Dsu'opame'iromu'ei}.</div><div>Next. Robin =
said that cumki and Ko could work in this field too. Then why not use {da'i=
} together with {ju'o, la'a} to describe those possible worlds?</div><div><=
br></div><div>I just can see the lack of a scheme.&nbsp;A-level is now more=
 or less described with&nbsp;{mu'ei}.</div><div>la xorxes was able to descr=
ibe {nu'o,pu'i} as derivations of mu'ei and ca'a if ca'a describes F-level.=
</div><div><br></div><div>Now I have questions about {cumki, lakne, kanpe} =
and {ju'o,la'a,ba'a}, {da'i} and probably {sruma/ru'a}, how they are relate=
d to A- and F-levels.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quot=
e" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;paddin=
g-left: 1ex;"> Moods involve a relation between the speaker and the proposi=
tion -- the speaker asserts p to be true, the speaker wishes p were true, t=
he speaker entertains the idea of p, the speaker asks whether p is true, an=
d so forth.
<br>
<br>(There's no harm in marking the protasis and/or apodosis of a condition=
al with da'i, but da'i doesn't generate conditional semantics.)
<br>
<br>--And.
<br></blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msg/lojban/-/lHhh6zKj44AJ">https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/lH=
hh6zKj44AJ</a>.<br />=20
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 />



------=_Part_2258_16802486.1346480322691--