On Fri, Jan 11, = 2013 at 11:24 AM, John E Clifford <kali9...@yahoo.c= om> wrote:

Sorry,= standard (in at least some groups I write in) logical notation: A for universal quantifier, S fo particular (L for salient, ? for interrogat= ive, but thosedon't turn up here).=A0 Quantif= iers=A0 take two wffs and a variable, AxFxGx is AllFsareGs, that universality restricted to the (non-null) exte= nsion of F.=A0 or [x:Fx]Gx.=A0 I suppose one could avoid the problem here by using=A0 (x)(Green x =3D> Seek I, x), but that doesn= 9;t really help.

I would be happy t= o have a better analysis of "seek", in particular, one that allow= ed for quantifiers to be placed properly without question, but I don't = see it anywhere.=A0 Much of the problem is in how we deal with intensional = phrases.=A0 Of the two usual approaches, having certain places specified as= such in the lexicon or having all places transparent but some phrases labe= lled as intensional, Lojban has chosen a position in the middle.=A0 All pla= ces are transparent, but some have recommended or required intensional phra= se structures for filling.=A0 Unfortunately, these cases don't cover all the intensional= cases (and cover a number which are not intensional as well), so we are le= ft with thing like thing {sisku} (which is not actually in Lojban, after al= l, but is popularly uses as though it were), where the transparent place yi= elds unwanted results.

Ultimately, of course, w= hat we want is a particular quantifier in the scope of the subjunctive, whi= ch is my informal summary of the role of {tu'a}.=A0 So, for me, at leas= t, {mi sisku tu'a da poi crino} means "I am looking for something = green" with no hint that a particular one (or even one in the present = UD) is required, since it expands to the more satisfying "I have a goa= l which would be satisfied just in case I were to have something green"= ;, with the quantifier tucked in the right place.=A0 The standard explanation of {tu'a} gets close to this = but gets bogged down in technicalities.
Your solution, as I understand it (if at all), is that {mi sisku da poi cri= no} is indeed transparent and the occurrence there of {da poi crino} may ch= ange the UD by adding an object to guarantee that the extension of {crino} = is non-null.=A0 If the extension of {crino} is already non-null, however, t= his object is to be identified with some already present object, which one = depending on which one I actually find (more or less).=A0 But that kind of = anonymous object isn't allowed in the semantics game, nor does it help,= since, as soon as its identity is revealed we fall back to the position of= the external quantifier (which we never did really leave, if the slot was = transparent), that I was really seeking this particular thing, not just any old thing at all.= =A0 Or, taking the broader view, I am really seeking every green thing indi= vidually.=A0 Not what is wanted.=A0
=A0 =

<= font face=3D"Arial">

From: v4hn= <m...@v4hn.de>
To: loj...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 4:42 AM
Subject: Re: [lojban] searching

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 06:42:53PM -0800, John E Clifford wrote:
> Ho= wsabout going back to the basics of "any" in English?
>
= > It is a context leaper, a universal embedded in a verso context
> with scope over the whole in which the context is subordinate.

= > So, what we want is Ax Greenx I seek x.

I already asked you two= days ago to explain your notation, please.
Does this mean something lik= e "forall x : Green(x).(seek(I, x))"
or "A(x) =3D> Green(x) =3D> seek(I, x)" or "forall x. = Green(x) =3D> seek(I, x)"
...

> Not, notice, {mi sisku= ro crino}, because {sisku}(in the thing sense,
> not the property se= nse) is short for "has a goal which would be fulfilled
> if I were to have (in whatever the appropriate sense is) x" and s= o every
> green thing fits and none is special ("if my goal were= fulfilled, I would have").

I'm not sure I like that "= goal driven" analysis of seek.
Especially, mixing up quantifiers and goal constraints is rather = confusing.

What your "Ax Greenx I seek x" is _supposed_ to= mean, I think, is the following.

There exists a goal G1 which I hav= e in mind, such that for all green things
it is true that if I have such a green object, the goal G1 is fulfilled.
I very much prefer the analysis I described in my last mail,
becaus= e if you try to apply quantifiers here, you have to be explicit about
the existential goal quantification.
Else you could end up searching for= _all_ green things:

forall x. there exists g. have(I, x) =3D> sa= tisfied(g)

(I just invented the "satisfied" for the lack o= f a better notation)

Again, I prefer to say that {mi sisku da poi crino} adds an
object t= o the universe of discourse which satisfies {crino} and can map
to a num= ber of physical objects, therefore creating the feeling of
a restricted = universal quantification.

We do this in NatLangs as well: "I'm looki= ng for a shirt.",
"I'm searching for something green."= ;, "Ich suche eine Kuh.",
"Je cherche une vache.", .= ..

Just to point this out again: This is an analysis which I proposed inmy last mail and which I never directly read about anywhere. Therefore,I'm still waiting for criticism and comments.

> This still = supposes, of course, that there is something green in the UD,
> so the property sense is still better.

> Of course, spelling= out the counterfactual stuff in such a way as to make
> the quantifi= er scope points clearer would be nice, too,
> but no one seems to lik= e {tu'a}
> and it is a little iffy around the edges anyhow.

I don't r= eally get, what you try to point out here.

v4hn

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@google= groups.com.

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

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com= /d/msg/lojban/-/r8er0cinPMYJ.

=20 To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.