Received: from mail-we0-f192.google.com ([74.125.82.192]:53511)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncBDUNF3UDXIJBB5ERZGEAKGQEAEVYF3I@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1U33ss-0008By-0Q; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 04:14:02 -0800
Received: by mail-we0-f192.google.com with SMTP id x10sf339273wey.29
        for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 04:13:42 -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=z2TaQ1/jACQX1jIDb+Jqy5TYXF1kt0jGJG+yF7sZhtY=;
        b=CDiMbKZRhZ09SjtQFBQch4abcBY22YGwE28qWRM1Na/RzItl9C4+1yw0szXYXfqaWj
         1sigU8ql4yhEQrv3AjZspPDmVz74mN8DSKRUKGWpXYUKewyjTW5Gf9ldsDBJLyZlPWLP
         +9mb5tnLcaS73z4oZvvIWBXCeCvJqNRmKfr+P6Xy1kyjS8gfvc9F4cWGsl3h660B0MuK
         U8eO3DENukeN9/EZMf2nVDLgcCZBYXjcmHpG/RnxTwCwdyyE+uUwtUYZCRgQyezSP2OJ
         EYWpwO2u0zPAiAz9x0/7y81YZz80LgTAASEI4muDIbn0hAJvOVgGQaVIDKEequMbomJH
         /YUg==
X-Received: by 10.180.75.8 with SMTP id y8mr177796wiv.20.1360152822067;
        Wed, 06 Feb 2013 04:13:42 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.180.100.133 with SMTP id ey5ls247634wib.32.gmail; Wed, 06 Feb
 2013 04:13:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.14.215.69 with SMTP id d45mr890028eep.6.1360152820656;
        Wed, 06 Feb 2013 04:13:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.14.215.69 with SMTP id d45mr890027eep.6.1360152820642;
        Wed, 06 Feb 2013 04:13:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dd17822.kasserver.com (dd17822.kasserver.com. [85.13.138.119])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m6si5762992een.1.2013.02.06.04.13.40
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Wed, 06 Feb 2013 04:13:40 -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-4dbc3a8b.pool.mediaWays.net [77.188.58.139])
	by dd17822.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E40DD8650F7
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Wed,  6 Feb 2013 13:13:39 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 13:13:39 +0100
From: v4hn <me@v4hn.de>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Place structure "types"
Message-ID: <20130206121339.GW10399@samsa.fritz.box>
References: <CAOpbp3dCmKwtB56x6r1-1o0uXHg=xUfT80fxz2S1rwnYXqCYig@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+gZtgKpLPGomjOGYcrm-wgN=uskEJQ5=7RbRcL0QnLj5hnsHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <88ff2b8e-3289-4df0-a88c-01ad3d71998f@googlegroups.com>
 <CA+gZtgK8Nw3uPjKdvx0zcSvdfUw06gmgWfmC7Xc_VXhTFSNQRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130205231758.GU10399@samsa.fritz.box>
 <CAMKwHj0UkW2e-XOMpmD-PtuPmruEJ+YWJm6KLCKeU4EyXR3w+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <1360110130.57305.YahooMailNeo@web184404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <1360110387.95780.YahooMailNeo@web184404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <20130206010413.GV10399@samsa.fritz.box>
 <1360120779.43575.YahooMailNeo@web184405.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="MhP8cYafZlTESjGT"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1360120779.43575.YahooMailNeo@web184405.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
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: <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>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /


--MhP8cYafZlTESjGT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 07:19:39PM -0800, John E Clifford wrote:
> I can't remember the names (even as vaguely as I remember Richard's)
> of Hans Kamp's stuff, but it would be a reliable place to go.

I'll look him up.

> The unreliable tends to be those that say that there are no opaque
> contexts "really" or try to deal with them without using alternate
> worlds or senses or their equivalents.

Although I tend to agree, this is clearly your judgement of a whole branch
of linguistic research. I wouldn't take it at face value.

> So the standard stuff either sets up a belief-world

agreed

> which differs from the starting UD

Don't you mix up belief worlds and universes of discourse here?
TTBOMK belief worlds are considered to be sets of propositions, whereas
universes of discourse are about keeping track of the individuals which are
the topic of the discourse.

> at least by having a non-null extension for "unicorn"

I agree in that this adds the sentence "unicorn(x)" to the belief-world.
I'm simply unsure about how to deal with x.

> or the whole thing is about the sense of "unicorn" and not about unicorns at all.

That's a problem of "ko'a believes that unicorns exist" imo.
It's really hard to argue for why "ko'a believes that one unicorn exists" should
be about intensional meaning, though people probably still try.

> Incidentally, a {lo/su'o pavyseljirna} in a {du'u} clause would never add unicorns
> to the starting UD (argument from the Stoics at least, if not earlier).

So the text {cy. krici lodu'u pa lo pavyseljirna goi ko'a se jirna re da .i ko'a cizra}
is semantically wrong in your opinion because there's no referent for {ko'a} around
in the second sentence? You said it's not in the main UD. I disagree.
(you could also just use {py. cizra})


v4hn

--MhP8cYafZlTESjGT
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlESSPMACgkQMBKLZs4+wjyt9gCgwWm7FaUy6EfF3ZKEDf9/Qkiy
bHwAn1Gb2piTqDv8ZeM1PlKnXauJCWuz
=1m8u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--MhP8cYafZlTESjGT--