Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.17.21;
Message-ID: <52F28B90.8020605@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 20:05:52 +0100
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo
References: <CAN2DD_E0QBcidfV+rp=N+rW1YeYtOanugo172BbgwFmswA2-SA@mail.gmail.com> <52F26B9E.2090001@gmx.de> <1391624371.29043.YahooMailNeo@web181102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1391624371.29043.YahooMailNeo@web181102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

la .pycyn. cu cusku di'e
> It seems that the constantly evolving xorlo (now moving far from 'lo' --
> and probably from xorxes as well)

I don't think so. It's just that some questions that often get asked 
about xorlo are actually more general than xorlo. Nothing is changing 
about xorlo either, it's just that when new people come around, they 
find a mess of underdocumented and scattered definitions and need to ask 
the same (or similar) questions each time again. This will only stop 
once there is a more complete specification that one can point someone 
to instead of having to re-open a discussion about xorlo.

> So, the basic 'lo broda' is "the salient node of
> the upward semilattice of jest on the set assigned to 'broda'" (some set
> of brodas and broda parts -- whatever that may mean for a particular
> kind of thing as broda).  'lo', unlike 'loi' says nothing about how the
> set involved is connected to the predicates involved (collective or
> distributive).

All that is well-known, although we tend to use different terminology.

> Variables range over L-sets or are plural, depending on
> your mathematical theology.  Etc.  do we need to fill in all the details
> and, if not, which ones?

We need to know if variables are plural or singular, that's all. 
Currently, they are "defined" as singular, for some value of "defined" 
that makes sense when there is no official body to define it.

The rules are simple enough, they just aren't layed out properly. (If 
they were, we wouldn't be having this discussion.)

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

-- 
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.