Received: from mail-we0-f187.google.com ([74.125.82.187]:35240) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1U2rmC-0005rh-V7; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:18:24 -0800 Received: by mail-we0-f187.google.com with SMTP id t11sf177437wey.4 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:18:01 -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:cc: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=lySy8Ko1aZwmb7dZVKf9sNjThbjAmtOCYdEXCxm34Pk=; b=yjq+5R/CM/eTvZTd+vNLp8pwThhp2Z3UfgULxWN93Cmj7QFTh/oAW9eRbHjJuop0HW CGok4gjyLKu8YC4BUGbCpE3ziJqSY1d278WmXqOT4niWkUWlUYw1Yj1O0Ve1NsHa8lLo txzb6AX54ZWX90MF2X3N5jEi2M3EdtOgINL+JMIz0EjmuLfr880VJ869q6EMumVghmGl L8XO1dnPS8gM0Y3Q70UYAtcw0lvsEcfCSDaQd3jkYLe66DTSaHJ/GtT+1OCi/7FWihif QU4e4ph5Lt38qUcVgFEtx62jXapEQBbOzcTmZ8tF5HFzhfeFCfmCR6Ab27YPODkleTra 0XqQ== X-Received: by 10.180.84.7 with SMTP id u7mr100879wiy.14.1360106281121; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:18:01 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.97.9 with SMTP id dw9ls143222wib.42.gmail; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:18:00 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.14.0.196 with SMTP id 44mr27723130eeb.6.1360106280437; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:18:00 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.14.0.196 with SMTP id 44mr27723128eeb.6.1360106280421; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:18:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from dd17822.kasserver.com (dd17822.kasserver.com. [85.13.138.119]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 6si2265863eej.0.2013.02.05.15.18.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:18:00 -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-4dbc22e3.pool.mediaWays.net [77.188.34.227]) by dd17822.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A3273865056; Wed, 6 Feb 2013 00:17:59 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 00:17:58 +0100 From: v4hn To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Cc: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Place structure "types" Message-ID: <20130205231758.GU10399@samsa.fritz.box> References: <88ff2b8e-3289-4df0-a88c-01ad3d71998f@googlegroups.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PhxIMoEr374zxJm2" 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: / --PhxIMoEr374zxJm2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 11:26:00AM -0500, Ian Johnson wrote: > For example, it is sensible to consider a universe of discourse > in which all the concrete objects exist in this universe. strange, but ok > Consider such a discourse, and suppose John > believes (incorrectly ru'a) that unicorns exist. still ok > {la djan [srera] krici lo du'u da pavyseljirna gi'e zasti} is completely fine. sure > {la djan [srera] krici lo du'u lo pavyseljirna cu zasti} is slightly weirder, > since now {lo pavyseljirna} should actually have a referent in the universe of discourse, Why should that be weird? The reference will create a new referent in the UD in my opinion. You can't keep the UD fixed anyway. > but we can wave our hands a little and allow for du'u-scope to induce > little universes of their own. No, we can't, because this kind of stupid reasoning creates the monkey sentence paradox and other problems as you've mentioned below. > {lo pavyseljirna cu [srera] jai se krici la djan fai lo ka ce'u zasti} > (something like "unicorns are believed by John to exist") is far more troubling, > because now there's really no syntactic excuse for {lo pavyseljirna} not being > in the universe of discourse. doi la latro'a joi la .John. do'u Please point me to some linguistic literature on the kind of universe of discourse you are using in these discussions. Papers are fine. It seems I disagree with the assumptions you make about them and we're running around in circles without a real basis. mi'e la .van. mu'o --PhxIMoEr374zxJm2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlERkyYACgkQMBKLZs4+wjz0fACff0CtgADTZJN31g4WjOWQpmZA OREAniTQY8A5pCDkjZIrMPJX0nKnIZH0 =QgB5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --PhxIMoEr374zxJm2--