Received: from mail-pd0-f186.google.com ([209.85.192.186]:37930) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1WBvOh-0007v6-HA for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:03:56 -0800 Received: by mail-pd0-f186.google.com with SMTP id v10sf992955pde.13 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:03:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=wTVJFG3wVl8KdUiWyo7+f4r2IpRE+M/ICjccCrNWgns=; b=E6jlYywztdYCPDdgw/xoRxnZHkhY0yPDwHZX5Uh2eLk1JXs2bmNZV4FfUB/XEHyfA2 jxoVJV8AynAQh+2UNuw/r+iu2nBRGZAgxNFCN9jTYRNRHTQPPHsqNxcfnuTQPpnJxWnt a2WFDv/psUtkFn4h/nL1gZKe8rMeeBcVCJUPqZHxOgMcqB1U2FfQmi7xDA2OFGjlC94q n+e8i9qOX+KTR0+Ws0WSnjyNfq/2XzZ3uGnB9Ln/Gg2CC//nSPDRNpa40OyN2nI63TN3 eINEcuqm9M+gTnxNdXSIE0o1Hp6LgjP2fokoe99QahsP7kBvgNWED7F/qbnx94J9AJua ffqQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=wTVJFG3wVl8KdUiWyo7+f4r2IpRE+M/ICjccCrNWgns=; b=P9NizB6hl3OdSHTThyrMK1AYPr7iXQvCRq/NQfX4mshkVN7CIMc/DhwW4kQp3i16HP MDGNLmv28aMamUTE2BLKugjqx+AjxSCqE+SNLZ/uk3Yu7BJO2ZjEVJ1c3wN1Ro0V0bU0 9vgshB52eroXVVf3ObpdhAE4MvGLVDZjadhIkHTG8SMS3HLaTfNM3oG0TZddDhDBGJxG qUsRG05TJj7zg9OyCdMILdel65FSd79TKTBe5ZVv+Y75DY8l9p5UNFU0psLIkrcu4dE3 bAvdfvn3Q+X1CMJcKFdy8m3JXTP4h7Ka5gSg57wOP8HaxZS3lm+whj5L7xMlAkUUh5S6 sYSg== X-Received: by 10.50.67.68 with SMTP id l4mr54777igt.1.1391817825384; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:03:45 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.13.104 with SMTP id g8ls955116igc.28.canary; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:03:45 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.50.101.201 with SMTP id fi9mr59247igb.3.1391817825048; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:03:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 16:03:43 -0800 (PST) From: guskant To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: <03555bbd-cc44-426f-94ee-65d557f2d301@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: <52F26B9E.2090001@gmx.de> <5e023b9a-515c-432b-a389-8f9af4766b51@googlegroups.com> <52F29ED8.1050607@gmx.de> <372dd8f1-1920-4afa-8d11-aa55696982a0@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: gusni.kantu@gmail.com 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: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1288_17720628.1391817823896" X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / ------=_Part_1288_17720628.1391817823896 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le samedi 8 f=C3=A9vrier 2014 05:54:27 UTC+9, xorxes a =C3=A9crit : > > > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:58 PM, guskant > > wrote: > >> >> If you use the term "constant" as of the version with plural quantifiers= ,=20 >> you should mention it in the gadri page, and also you should explain how= =20 >> Lojban treats plural quantifiers. Otherwise I don't understand how a=20 >> constant implies no implicit quantifier. >> > > > There's a pretty long explanation of what I meant by constant there=20 > already, I think it's clear that a plural constant is meant: > > - Any term without an explicit outer quantifier is a *constant*, i.e.= =20 > not a quantified term. This means that it *refers* to one or more=20 > individuals, and changing the order in which the constant term appears= with=20 > respect to a negation or with respect to a quantified term will not ch= ange=20 > the meaning of the sentence. A constant is something that always keeps= the=20 > same referent or referents. For example {lo broda} always refers to br= odas.=20 > > It is still unclear which logical axioms are applied to a plural constant. I now understand that your term "constant" is neither of classical=20 predicate logic, nor of Thomas McKay. However, I don't understand how is it= =20 applied in logic of Lojban. I need axioms for the term "constant". =20 > > =20 > As for plural quantifiers, I once proposed "su'oi", "ro'oi", "no'oi" and= =20 > "me'oi".=20 > > I know, but they were finally abandoned. =20 > this means that the sentence "any term without an explicit outer=20 >>>> quantifier is a constant" automatically implicates an outer quantifier= =20 >>>> {su'o}, >>>> >>> >>> It shouldn't implicate that. "F{c} -> Ex F(x)" does not mean that "F(c)= "=20 >>> and "Ex F(x)" have the same meaning, nor that "c" is just a shorthand f= or=20 >>> "Ex ...x...". Similarly xorlo says that "lo broda" is not just shorthan= d=20 >>> for "su'o lo broda". >>> =20 >>> >> I did not mean that "F(c)" and "Ex F(x)" have the same meaning, nor that= =20 >> "c" is just a shorthand for "Ex ...x...". >> When F(c) is said, it says implicitly that "Ex F(x)" is true. >> > > If c is singular, yes. That's not what I mean by implicit hidden=20 > quantifier though. All I mean is that saying "lo broda" is not just anoth= er=20 > way of saying "su'o lo broda" nor "[some quantifier] lo broda".=20 > > =20 > >> and it contradicts to xorlo itself that there are no default=20 >>>> quantifiers. >>>> >>> >>> Not just no default quantifiers. No implicit hidden quantifiers at all,= =20 >>> The point is that "lo broda" is not a quantification of the bridi it=20 >>> appears in, the way "su'o lo broda" is. >>> >> >> >> I agree to that point, and I consider that F(c) implies implicit hidden= =20 >> quantifiers, and conclude that it contradicts xorlo. >> > > Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that.=20 > Because I did think that c is always singular, saying {lo broda} implies=20 saying {su'o da poi ke'a broda}. It is not {su'o lo broda}, but another=20 quantified term is implied.=20 My problem is, for example, how {lo no broda} can be meaningful if {lo=20 broda} implies {su'o da poi ke'a broda}.=20 To solve this problem, I need axioms for "plural constant". =20 --=20 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 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. ------=_Part_1288_17720628.1391817823896 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Le samedi 8 f=C3=A9vrier 2014 05:54:27 UTC+9, xorx= es a =C3=A9crit :



On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at= 10:58 PM, guskant <gusni...@gmail.com> wrote:

If you use the t= erm "constant" as of the version with plural quantifiers, you should mentio= n it in the gadri page, and also you should explain how Lojban treats plura= l quantifiers. Otherwise I don't understand how a constant implies no impli= cit quantifier.


There's a prett= y long explanation of what I meant by constant there already, I think it's = clear that a plural constant is meant:
  • Any term without an explicit outer quantifier is a constan= t, i.e. not a quantified term. This means that it ref= ers to one or more individuals, and changing the order in whi= ch the constant term appears with respect to a negation or with respect to = a quantified term will not change the meaning of the sentence. A constant i= s something that always keeps the same referent or referents. For example {= lo broda} always refers to brodas. 
<= /blockquote>

It is still unclear which logical axioms ar= e applied to a plural constant.
I now understand that your term "= constant" is neither of classical predicate logic, nor of Thomas McKay. How= ever, I don't understand how is it applied in logic of Lojban. I need axiom= s for the term "constant".

 

As for plural quantifiers, I once proposed "su= 'oi", "ro'oi", "no'oi" and "me'oi". 



I know, but they were finally abandoned.


 
=
this means that the sentence "any term without an exp= licit outer quantifier is a constant" automatically implicates an outer qua= ntifier {su'o},

It shouldn't implicate that. "F{c} -> Ex F(x)" does not mean that "F(c)"= and "Ex F(x)" have the same meaning, nor that "c" is just a shorthand for = "Ex ...x...". Similarly xorlo says that "lo broda" is not just shorthand fo= r "su'o lo broda".
 
I did not = mean that "F(c)" and "Ex F(x)" have the same meaning, nor that "c" is just = a shorthand for "Ex ...x...".
When F(c) is said, it says implicitly that "Ex F(x)" is true.

If c is singular, yes. That's not what = I mean by implicit hidden quantifier though. All I mean is that saying "lo = broda" is not just another way of saying "su'o lo broda" nor "[some quantif= ier] lo broda". 

 
and it contradicts to xorlo itself that there are no = default quantifiers.

Not just no default quantifiers. No = implicit hidden quantifiers at all, The point is that "lo broda" is not a q= uantification of the bridi it appears in, the way "su'o lo broda" is.


I a= gree to that point, and I consider that F(c) implies implicit hidden quanti= fiers, and conclude that it contradicts xorlo.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that. <= /div>


Beca= use I did think that c is always singular, saying {lo broda} implies saying= {su'o da poi ke'a broda}. It is not {su'o lo broda}, but another quantifie= d term is implied. 

My problem is, for exampl= e, how {lo no broda} can be meaningful if {lo broda} implies {su'o da poi k= e'a broda}. 
To solve this problem, I need axioms for "plura= l constant".

 

--
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.
------=_Part_1288_17720628.1391817823896--