Received: from mail-vc0-f187.google.com ([209.85.220.187]:40189) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1WAT4D-0000dq-Br for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:49 -0800 Received: by mail-vc0-f187.google.com with SMTP id ld13sf2462070vcb.14 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:precedence :mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=bEzG31PvnK61EGr5tGBu/w+dC9HE799OlBjKjC6f9x8=; b=tQGtzdwcSL4Op6x8odXzPfLrpxcJN+zCfL/vaZfv6Cza1QZNuNyTREQSBmERYYrhrw K+5NeBiQ8ADT4frLlfIXx9BGsMVVm5s+ERhs+M38shcuhPNI6lAsRpV9/E6s09ie3VLL RBSDGQRxXOvtiYdkqiSRk7cg5XXsGXFQh07molzYICfEfJQ3Aqx5+RLvERPRn+sEnSC2 M0JAGO6Gqkk5z/Mo/riSVLH8XHpR/oqFEr9N9UxLtnGyfbiCabDox9NA7ls99aT6pI2d UR+iPX3h/NLwUFRob9wL68wnoUJyjfFTF6ed7wWzFYqOL7qhmPTBob694CdBSCQA3bHh M/HQ== X-Received: by 10.50.78.136 with SMTP id b8mr246965igx.12.1391470594842; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:34 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.60.74 with SMTP id f10ls2409412igr.16.gmail; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:34 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.50.18.49 with SMTP id t17mr6655913igd.3.1391470594136; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qa0-x22d.google.com (mail-qa0-x22d.google.com [2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22d]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gw3si1250160qcb.2.2014.02.03.15.36.34 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:34 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lurifax@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22d as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22d; Received: by mail-qa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id ii20so11083495qab.18 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:34 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.44.119 with SMTP id f110mr58218945qga.31.1391470594011; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:36:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.91.55 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 15:36:13 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dan_Ros=E9n?= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 00:36:13 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lurifax@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lurifax@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22d as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lurifax@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.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: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113a9c4078b8f104f188fe20 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --001a113a9c4078b8f104f188fe20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear selmriste, It seems that using xorlo prevents explicitly talking about indivduals, such as /one elephant/, a seemingly simple concept. Let's start with an inner quantifier: lo pa xanto = zo'e noi ke'a xanto gi'e zilkancu li pa lo xanto, However, the latter {lo xanto} in zilkancu3 can denote about a group of elephants, so {lo pa xanto} can indeed be many elephants. Outer quantifiers will not help, as they will only range over the inner object. Using zo'e directly is obviously fruitless since xorlo seems to influence how both zo'e, and how noi work: together they remove our abilities to explicitly talk about individuals. This make me assume that it also affects the da-family, so {pa xanto} is also out of the question. Finally, any brivla will not help us here as the dreaded lo-zo'e-noi-trinity will always be able to sneak in a group where we want an individual. For instance in {lo pa kantu be lo pa xanto}, or {lo xantyka'u}, we still might end up with a onesome of elephants. Why was it decided to make it like this? It seems that a monolingual jbopre would not /really/ be able to differentiate an elephant from its flock. (But perhaps not if we were talking about sheep, but I digress) Hopefully I have misunderstood everything. If this is so, please enlighten me. ki'e mi'e la danr -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --001a113a9c4078b8f104f188fe20 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear selmriste,

It seems that using xorlo preve= nts explicitly talking about indivduals, such as
/one elephant/, a seemi= ngly simple concept. Let's start with an inner quantifier:

=A0= =A0=A0 lo pa xanto =3D zo'e noi ke'a xanto gi'e zilkancu li pa = lo xanto,

However, the latter {lo xanto} in zilkancu3 can denote about a group of=
elephants, so {lo pa xanto} can indeed be many elephants.=A0 Outer quan= tifiers
will not help, as they will only range over the inner object.
Using zo'e directly is obviously fruitless since xorlo seems to inf= luence how
both zo'e, and how noi work: together they remove our abi= lities to explicitly
talk about individuals. This make me assume that it= also affects the
da-family, so {pa xanto} is also out of the question.

Finally, any b= rivla will not help us here as the dreaded lo-zo'e-noi-trinity
will = always be able to sneak in a group where we want an individual. For
instance in {lo pa kantu be lo pa xanto}, or {lo xantyka'u}, we still m= ight end
up with a onesome of elephants.

Why was it decided to ma= ke it like this?=A0 It seems that a monolingual jbopre
would not /reall= y/ be able to differentiate an elephant from its flock.
(But perhaps not if we were talking about sheep, but I digress)

Hope= fully I have misunderstood everything. If this is so, please enlighten me.<= br>
ki'e mi'e la danr

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail 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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--001a113a9c4078b8f104f188fe20--