Received: from mail-we0-f186.google.com ([74.125.82.186]:38763) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TsFrk-0000lB-Lu; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:48:19 -0800 Received: by mail-we0-f186.google.com with SMTP id u54sf9229049wey.13 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:47:52 -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:date:from :to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent: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; bh=r4DaN5ufL8Z4l5ILK1URViGd1D4GLsRWtnr5D12khKA=; b=WHMB/pmjm7pLY5ksoG/zZCV4wEAnG8y4OisrzesMEi75hlgdnCXMYFTvbklVp5cCnj xiKzzWPXvEjZxos8b8EZfrUR1odOHJ3vTky7zNPKuoFJmckubj0p2S1L8F2bz07nDZqS xDOLJO6u95xGKD/qTjW942aohduQWtRXg2UwSCH1zBG8GMaOGk1No5171CKj6TrN0Xe7 5N0NY8gIJ0292JDQ+nGkHyu9eVkbSimN73CP3gC7P/DhGXTcl23C0XQbqBcUrhbLybdX HjgHp9qMX4VowkygLEhJ2jdhnnUTIX/gyS1N9dggpcqq5qPOPAPKL1sK7Ayj1eg/N5qL POvg== X-Received: by 10.152.144.229 with SMTP id sp5mr156515lab.4.1357577271363; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:47:51 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.152.162.17 with SMTP id xw17ls481632lab.56.gmail; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:47:49 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.14.0.196 with SMTP id 44mr75639370eeb.6.1357577269653; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:47:49 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.14.0.196 with SMTP id 44mr75639367eeb.6.1357577269641; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from dd17822.kasserver.com (dd17822.kasserver.com. [85.13.138.119]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g9si7932294eeo.1.2013.01.07.08.47.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 85.13.138.119 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of me@v4hn.de) client-ip=85.13.138.119; Received: from samsa (brln-4dba86d8.pool.mediaWays.net [77.186.134.216]) by dd17822.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 02E3D860A75 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 17:47:48 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 17:47:48 +0100 From: v4hn To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Quantifier exactness Message-ID: <20130107164748.GD17408@samsa.fritz.box> References: <20130107160450.GC17408@samsa.fritz.box> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ffoCPvUAPMgSXi6H" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Original-Sender: me@v4hn.de X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.13.138.119 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of me@v4hn.de) smtp.mail=me@v4hn.de Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --ffoCPvUAPMgSXi6H Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 11:15:22AM -0500, Ian Johnson wrote: > "I like him more than you do" is incorrect. Sure, I didn't mean that to be a translation. It's just an example of the kind of debate I was talking about. > Since the quantified variable is instantiated separately in each > of the function applications, the original sentence under exact quantifie= rs > means it's more like > > > > >>> > {mi zmadu do lo ni ce'u nelci pa lo re prenu} > "It is more true that I like exactly one of them than it is true > that you like exactly one of them."=20 I still don't get why you guys introduce the "is more true" here. I can't see how this is in the original sentence! "I like one of them more than you like one of them." is something completely different from your translation, so if my translation is wrong, then how would it be correct by the way? > This re-instantiation is why the original example is > counterintuitive. I'm not fully sure whether I would draw the same > conclusion from your second translation; Which conclusion? Do you think it works out, or don't you think so? > I think I might, though, since > "one of them" is introduced twice (unlike arpis's previous translation, > which only introduces it once and hence makes it seem like the referent is > the same). v4hn --ffoCPvUAPMgSXi6H Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlDq/DQACgkQMBKLZs4+wjzx8QCgmlJcCHccNsL/9YBQtTvCdvd3 ePUAn0MWRIGJmaP1hYVDpNKciqPw4Cty =xBN9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ffoCPvUAPMgSXi6H--