Received: from mail-ye0-f188.google.com ([209.85.213.188]:37400)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncBCRZPH6MCMIKVRHHRECRUBD2PMHXQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1UDwzi-0000Xl-HU; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:06:13 -0800
Received: by mail-ye0-f188.google.com with SMTP id m10sf536621yen.15
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:05:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:date:from:to:message-id
         :in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender
         :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=fa7LR+hlMdYbHEsUmlabTecJNh+e6EmeUSXgwc1owgo=;
        b=PzsjlTT/+Ckpl6gv5WgSEvzb7qhcVTmwoNc8jQtLrcJJUQpob5XmmyRl80TrRR+6En
         W2/I8ywdrY6ZZtX8rUW8sQIEEIhoR8TNQuhXWvYuft7EbRauS1b6FijV2uqBNtC4a++v
         iQBHUGPLdOxx7cFwr8cTvSxH7Y+p47Av2rMK37r3lyoraWhxlewqfBTjb/M5m8hYf7iV
         3SdZtJRV3wr1+OyrF9LH4Po55EPpPvkn6MovCIuRjSDpOITyuJ54U9erPMEuKePoY/FZ
         mpmUdWROL7XHj5Twg2J4pFkfaZZLYJVocpPmWQkOX+VK8WsKHsrbEBf1yK/V2HPb/7cN
         o7hg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:date:from:to:message-id
         :in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender
         :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=fa7LR+hlMdYbHEsUmlabTecJNh+e6EmeUSXgwc1owgo=;
        b=HRScomvNg9hlRRRDn0KbiUOwfbyQuj+r6YBMgVKd5kqND2WrZUCAxaI9kqZWJN/wiE
         CcE1fPL5NP/V38ZAA+JY8kRzWM4phlU8snI/78OYm1DqB/njjsKzcHKA4nRKdyX4p4un
         Xx7V/mzM63XErHVeF2YEdfty3bxdkrMjQJmvR/0DTYuSwnkpZHA7Ve1+yi8lhmO0SUMb
         r/CrgtWHkKs6oKu47URs5La0Mpu5F5iaM8d0ufWTtzmUw3qvVLnFwfWvr7UtBqlWxsdy
         oPzgOqbe6c69V74+XTY8Q815bZJ7+fQ9ig8sC03b4ZkT/UK/ZGfxPrHsdT+mT/xqudHh
         jZ7w==
X-Received: by 10.49.58.167 with SMTP id s7mr84606qeq.5.1362747947887;
        Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:05:47 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.49.36.138 with SMTP id q10ls157501qej.2.gmail; Fri, 08 Mar
 2013 05:05:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.49.75.66 with SMTP id a2mr86531qew.21.1362747946152;
        Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:05:46 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 05:05:45 -0800 (PST)
From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <70b76209-bb6e-4c9f-a3fb-f175420f4507@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <5139E065.1090802@gmx.de>
References: <20130220133507.GB3918@samsa.fritz.box> <e1ff2e11-29bd-4ca2-84b9-a25f278843b4@googlegroups.com> <5139DE1F.1050001@gmx.de>
 <5139E065.1090802@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: {le} and {lo} ... and Keith Donnellan?
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com
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: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_572_8428675.1362747945666"
X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_572_8428675.1362747945666
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1



On Friday, March 8, 2013 4:58:13 PM UTC+4, selpa'i wrote:
>
> la selpa'i cu cusku di'e 
> > [snip] 
>
> I accidently hit send, here is the rest: 
>
> The attributive use at the bottom of my last post does not make a claim 
> about an identified object, since we don't know who murdered Smith, just 
> that that person must have been crazy to murder Smith. {lo} there is 
> rather better than {le}. 
>
> The referential use: "For example, suppose that Jones has been charged 
> with Smith's murder and has been placed on trial. Imagine that there is 
> a discussion of Jones's odd behavior at his trial. We might sum up our 
> impression of his behavior by saying, "Smith's murderer is insane." If 
> someone asks to whom we are referring, by using this description, the 
> answer here is "Jones." This, I shall say, is a referential use of the 
> definite description." 
>
> Here, one could make an argument for {le}, the speaker knows the 
> real-world object ("Jones"), and by using {le} they can try to make this 
> explicit, but again, {lo} doesn't seem any worse here, especially since 
> it's so obvious who the murderer is in this situation. 
>
> The generic use is obviously {lo} as well. 
>
> Overall, these distinctions don't seem very interesting in Lojban. But 
> maybe others have more to say about this. 
>
> mu'o mi'e la selpa'i 
>
>

I just have to add that *selpa'i*s doesn't contradict what I described. 
It's rather a necessary continuation of the topic applied to Lojban.
What is interesting, though is that if {le} is for referential use (and I 
think such understanding can be useful) then what can be used to explicitly 
mark a construct as referential?

--- 
> All the quotes are from 
> http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/00-01/phil_lang/readings/donnellan-01.html 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



------=_Part_572_8428675.1362747945666
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Friday, March 8, 2013 4:58:13 PM UTC+4, selpa'i wrote:<blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: =
1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">la selpa'i cu cusku di'e
<br>&gt; [snip]
<br>
<br>I accidently hit send, here is the rest:
<br>
<br>The attributive use at the bottom of my last post does not make a claim=
=20
<br>about an identified object, since we don't know who murdered Smith, jus=
t=20
<br>that that person must have been crazy to murder Smith. {lo} there is=20
<br>rather better than {le}.
<br>
<br>The referential use: "For example, suppose that Jones has been charged=
=20
<br>with Smith's murder and has been placed on trial. Imagine that there is=
=20
<br>a discussion of Jones's odd behavior at his trial. We might sum up our=
=20
<br>impression of his behavior by saying, "Smith's murderer is insane." If=
=20
<br>someone asks to whom we are referring, by using this description, the=
=20
<br>answer here is "Jones." This, I shall say, is a referential use of the=
=20
<br>definite description."
<br>
<br>Here, one could make an argument for {le}, the speaker knows the=20
<br>real-world object ("Jones"), and by using {le} they can try to make thi=
s=20
<br>explicit, but again, {lo} doesn't seem any worse here, especially since=
=20
<br>it's so obvious who the murderer is in this situation.
<br>
<br>The generic use is obviously {lo} as well.
<br>
<br>Overall, these distinctions don't seem very interesting in Lojban. But=
=20
<br>maybe others have more to say about this.
<br>
<br>mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I just have to add that=
 <i>selpa'i</i>s doesn't contradict what I described. It's rather a necessa=
ry continuation of the topic applied to Lojban.</div><div>What is interesti=
ng, though is that if {le} is for referential use (and I think such underst=
anding can be useful) then what can be used to explicitly mark a construct =
as referential?</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: =
1ex;">---
<br>All the quotes are from=20
<br><a href=3D"http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/00-01/phil_lang/readings/donnel=
lan-01.html" target=3D"_blank">http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/<wbr>00-01/phil=
_lang/readings/<wbr>donnellan-01.html</a>
<br></blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3De=
n">http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_572_8428675.1362747945666--