Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 07:34:55 -0800 (PST)
From: guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <8aee965c-19d0-436d-a7ed-2100e481e639@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <52F60DA3.4080507@lojban.org>
References: <CAN2DD_E0QBcidfV+rp=N+rW1YeYtOanugo172BbgwFmswA2-SA@mail.gmail.com> <52F26B9E.2090001@gmx.de> <5e023b9a-515c-432b-a389-8f9af4766b51@googlegroups.com> <52F29ED8.1050607@gmx.de> <a337096c-d88e-4387-a3d7-9642195e72af@googlegroups.com> <CAO7tK2fqC3RQkHDE5unLx-z+5U4VU2nWempwEnzDAcpyB810pw@mail.gmail.com> <PDyb1n00M56Cr6M01DycXg>
 <52F60DA3.4080507@lojban.org>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_1760_8864707.1391873695963"
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_1760_8864707.1391873695963
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Le samedi 8 f=C3=A9vrier 2014 19:57:39 UTC+9, lojbab a =C3=A9crit :
>
> On 2/6/2014 8:58 PM, guskant wrote:=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > Le vendredi 7 f=C3=A9vrier 2014 06:22:09 UTC+9, xorxes a =C3=A9crit :=
=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >     On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:34 AM, guskant <gusni...@gmail.com> wrote:=
=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >         Although it will become out of topic, I have another suggestion=
=20
> >         related to the BPFK page of gadri.=20
> >=20
> >         "Any term without an explicit outer quantifier is a constant"=
=20
> >         should be changed to=20
> >         "Any term without an explicit outer quantifier can be a=20
> constant",=20
> >         because an usual predicate logic has an axiom on a constant c=
=20
> >         that "F(c) {inaja} there is at least one (individual) x such=20
> >         that F(x)";=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >     That applies to singular constants, whereas unquantified terms need=
=20
> >     not be singular, but the version with plural quantifiers will still=
=20
> >     be valid.=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > Actually, there is no explicit plural qiantifier in Lojban, though=20
> > implicitly there are.=20
>
> su'ore is the plural quantifier=20
>


That is a singular quantifier. I did not mean it by "plural quantifier". I=
=20
meant that of plural logic.
=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_1760_8864707.1391873695963
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><br>Le samedi 8 f=C3=A9vrier 2014 19:57:39 UTC+9, lojb=
ab a =C3=A9crit&nbsp;:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;=
margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">On 2/6/2=
014 8:58 PM, guskant wrote:
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; Le vendredi 7 f=C3=A9vrier 2014 06:22:09 UTC+9, xorxes a =C3=A9cri=
t :
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:34 AM, guskant &lt;<a>gusni=
...@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Although it will become out of topic, =
I have another suggestion
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; related to the BPFK page of gadri.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; "Any term without an explicit outer qu=
antifier is a constant"
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; should be changed to
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; "Any term without an explicit outer qu=
antifier can be a constant",
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; because an usual predicate logic has a=
n axiom on a constant c
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; that "F(c) {inaja} there is at least o=
ne (individual) x such
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; that F(x)";
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; That applies to singular constants, whereas unquanti=
fied terms need
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; not be singular, but the version with plural quantif=
iers will still
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; be valid.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; Actually, there is no explicit plural qiantifier in Lojban, though
<br>&gt; implicitly there are.
<br>
<br>su'ore is the plural quantifier
<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>That is a singular quantifi=
er. I did not mean it by "plural quantifier". I meant that of plural logic.=
</div><div>&nbsp;</div></div>

<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">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</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 />

------=_Part_1760_8864707.1391873695963--