Received: from mail-fa0-f63.google.com ([209.85.161.63]:54204)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncBC65FOEL4UJRBYE7TCDQKGQE4UKM4DY@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1Tqtvl-0003fZ-Ul; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:10:46 -0800
Received: by mail-fa0-f63.google.com with SMTP id p1sf6658939fap.8
        for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:10:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received: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=97ymLRnUVzp/WqWYqLaIJlhlpOyNRhsP+wTRmZ3+PG0=;
        b=GF0KyrdmBRN0J1fI9+zRT8w0aDZll4vGWXVzP6d5KHF8EasS98zlXif9pVvjnp13GG
         WUKZioFYZo2s1BUMq9dfum0VI1dYlHkgvnY2IUMBLKcl11fYAXsPpIS+VIrgojjCci9a
         +bcDMcVrqIwh5jeId1q6EEAzRzN2CCqaLtdKSnfijZsbeikwjyOgGbbIsPBGi+4/SlRQ
         uGJqsTJLgVYwKCFADKWUI/upCHrJy1qjvK0IEy9AEo6nF2ruIUQh7DmMEHby946vibFq
         miPi4Xp8P5QjKA6CQ0RWmlnrM1BgYt572KLESX61jXtFLUUIRjBxF/jm8UrqUyusVUR6
         2VRA==
X-Received: by 10.180.98.227 with SMTP id el3mr9052898wib.10.1357254626243;
        Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:10:26 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.181.13.78 with SMTP id ew14ls7842032wid.20.canary; Thu, 03 Jan
 2013 15:10:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.14.205.194 with SMTP id j42mr63929066eeo.2.1357254624695;
        Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:10:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.14.205.194 with SMTP id j42mr63929065eeo.2.1357254624684;
        Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:10:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net. [212.227.17.21])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id z44si18012923een.0.2013.01.03.15.10.24;
        Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:10:24 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.17.21;
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.16]) by mrigmx.server.lan
 (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lu28G-1Spt8o22f0-011OY2 for
 <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:10:24 +0100
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 03 Jan 2013 23:10:24 -0000
Received: from p54AF417E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.2.100]) [84.175.65.126]
  by mail.gmx.net (mp016) with SMTP; 04 Jan 2013 00:10:24 +0100
X-Authenticated: #54293076
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+1Fb4gP+G1jZvgpSvR+NFBGpFjhCqDr7wsSKRWDt
	87pHbUOcdpF9xO
Message-ID: <50E60FE1.1090306@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:10:25 +0100
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Context and precision (was:Re: [lojban-beginners]
 Special reference, underspecified)
References: <CAMKwHj11RcsUWPf9YR_Dp1b_J+RJKWX5h=MHtQD7AkzEWF69OA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+gZtg+-qwjeJvHD0DqBrA3WMTj3jU=rv6KCiKsRLQhy7oyaYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMKwHj21=Xp043qnDqWS2dP3zA0TAX3g=6CHYL1i8cq3kgp_yA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMKwHj21=Xp043qnDqWS2dP3zA0TAX3g=6CHYL1i8cq3kgp_yA@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 212.227.17.21 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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

la .aionys. cu cusku di'e
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com
> <mailto:blindbravado@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     The problem with this is that we don't have mechanisms for
>     explicitly handling the universe of discourse. Anything you talk
>     about is automatically bound within the hidden variable "the
>     universe of discourse", and you can only indirectly influence what
>     is in this domain. "Everything that has ever been at any location in
>     the universe at any point in time" is implicitly "Everything that
>     ... and is also in the universe of discourse" by default.
>
>     Another example of this is the approach to what outer quantifiers
>     should mean. Assuming we've come to some agreement on what the
>     universe of discourse is for the moment, should {ci da} mean
>     "exactly three things" as the CLL proclaims? The way I understand
>     what you're saying, you would think that it shouldn't, and instead
>     there should be another PA for "exactly", and without that addition
>     {ci da} should be something like "at least three, and probably not
>     tremendously larger than three". At least as an outer quantifier; in
>     {lo cacra be li ci} it would be more like "close to three, possibly
>     with some error on either side". Am I right here?
>
>
> No. I think it should mean exactly three. The difference is that I think
> "exactly three" should only be considered within context. If we're
> talking about the house next door, and I say {ci prenu} = {ci da poi
> prenu}, it should mean that there are exactly three people in the
> context of the house next door, not that there are exactly three people,
> in the whole of time and space, real and imagined, etc..., whatever the
> scope of "universe of discourse" is.

I'm not sure you're saying this, but "ci prenu cu broda" does not mean 
that "there are exactly three people in the universe period", it means 
"there are exactly three people in the universe that broda", which is a 
big difference. Even without much context (though a certain tense and 
place is almost always automatically assumed), such da-based statements 
are not as extreme as some some seem to have claimed in the past and 
also in this thread, since there is always an the additional restriction 
that is the bridi they are contained in.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

-- 
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.