Received: from mail-qa0-f59.google.com ([209.85.216.59]:57116) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1WHkV2-0005RP-Q7 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:36 -0800 Received: by mail-qa0-f59.google.com with SMTP id m5sf1304798qaj.14 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=kvlnbvu1ns5pBHq0LDtENAza8Xip3zAoOeXtn63Y8vQ=; b=AFdWsxbylpp34j4F5mhYwyLetdO2PHotAVv030elwzn9Lg+NrOSZB8w6LasQN+FVUb I7B/7d1/6S9Jt28c/lwV5VxVFcs3xZj5UCzDy4UQ6e4EdXSBS1qp8mymhQNSZQB3ao3O KZmbNVOUr4nmwiL2Kp4H5wy9O74NVgR5lyWz7homErvrXdH/UEDS6paak5Ytu/zKXB7T j1ExmzUPCoBgmC1ZVNB74Jl8twjOv7vYgKnL+bQccRfuRMQugMFRlUa6y4CNqq3VgDSN mvgt9fNdHiT7gzZfQd4SOSYLIAZ2qN0gvDJTySxZJ1ZgFvYOSasGACyRH5QSmpTY23ya vzAQ== X-Received: by 10.140.31.194 with SMTP id f60mr365270qgf.5.1393205902503; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:22 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.140.24.226 with SMTP id 89ls637536qgr.14.gmail; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:22 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.236.179.172 with SMTP id h32mr7883295yhm.16.1393205902129; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vc0-x22d.google.com (mail-vc0-x22d.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22d]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hh7si2602410vdb.1.2014.02.23.17.38.22 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22d as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22d; Received: by mail-vc0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id ld13so5217767vcb.18 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.68.5 with SMTP id t5mr10925458vci.63.1393205902031; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.221.72.74 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 17:38:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <390f1b9f-6edd-42f2-8474-ad1f3610cca3@googlegroups.com> References: <52F26B9E.2090001@gmx.de> <5e023b9a-515c-432b-a389-8f9af4766b51@googlegroups.com> <52F29ED8.1050607@gmx.de> <372dd8f1-1920-4afa-8d11-aa55696982a0@googlegroups.com> <03555bbd-cc44-426f-94ee-65d557f2d301@googlegroups.com> <592497c0-5db5-420e-867f-8df1663eca27@googlegroups.com> <52F65A5C.90605@gmx.de> <348c23bf-6d9f-4a05-bfe7-69b141c03cb7@googlegroups.com> <52F776EE.6070406@gmx.de> <6ffd64d2-2e2c-4b83-8722-b7f262f5837a@googlegroups.com> <52F7A4D5.5070106@gmx.de> <56096dec-1969-420d-b4e5-b8539cbe0cc0@googlegroups.com> <52F8FAA2.9030009@gmx.de> <52FE053C.3000604@gmx.de> <1e6d5917-ad1e-4c5b-abb7-5deb92110b83@googlegroups.com> <68bacba4-a957-481c-ba00-211db2de8dc3@googlegroups.com> <2f4f0766-1f52-46f0-80af-b4de86d9b5bd@googlegroups.com> <618e6524-d7f0-46c9-8d0b-bbee2dd0cd41@googlegroups.com> <36c4c2b2-8f8c-4d44-ac8e-48c02d45a233@googlegroups.com> <4b6b2cb9-51e5-47f6-97a9-2dec16406864@googlegroups.com> <390f1b9f-6edd-42f2-8474-ad1f3610cca3@googlegroups.com> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 22:38:21 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22d as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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=047d7b3a89d6e3c12b04f31d0682 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --047d7b3a89d6e3c12b04f31d0682 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 2:07 PM, guskant wrote: > > You give {su'o pa mei} to all the referent that are individual(s) of a > universe of discourse, > No, not just individuals. Everything and anything satisfies "su'o pa mei", including any non-individuals that there may be in the universe of discourse.. > while I give {su'o pa mei} to certain members of it, including > non-indiviidual members, not to all. > But why? Why do you want some things not to satisfy "su'o pa mei" which basically should mean "x1 is/are something(s)"? You still haven't explained why you want to define "su'o pa mei" in such a particular way. > Using {ke'a}, our definitions are described as follows: >>> (D1-7) ko'a su'o pa mei >>> (D1) ke'a su'o N mei := su'oi da poi me ke'a ku'o su'oi de poi me ke'a >>> zo'u ge da su'o N-1 mei gi de na me da >>> (D2) ke'a N mei := ke'a su'o N mei gi'e nai su'o N+1 mei >>> (D3) lo PA broda := zo'e noi ke'a PA mei gi'e broda >>> >>> When (D1) and (D2) are applied to a particular sumti, ke'a are replaced >>> with it. As for (D3), ke'a is in noi-clause, and it is already fixed to >>> zo'e, and is not replaced with another sumti, of course. >>> >>> Because (D1-7) defines only for {ko'a}, (D1) (D2) (D3) are valid only >>> for sumti that involves a referent of {ko'a} such as {ko'e noi ko'a me >>> ke'a}, {ko'i no'u ko'a jo'u ko'o} etc. (D1) (D2) (D3) are not used for >>> other sumti unless (D1-7) is applied to one of the referents that is >>> involved by the sumti. >>> >> >> If D1-7 defines only for ko'a, then it is not necessarily valid for ro'oi >> da poi me ko'a. You need "ro'oi da poi me ko'a cu su'o mei" if you want it >> to be valid for anything among ko'a. But that won't make it valid for ko'a >> jo'u ko'o if something in ko'o is not in ko'a. >> > > > No. When (D1-7) defines for {ko'a}, the referent of {ko'a} satisfies {su'o > pa mei} _non-distributively_. > Any other referents that are {me ko'a} do not satisfy {su'o pa mei}. > You don't know, that's not part of D1-7. If that's what you want, then you need something like: (D1-8) ke'a su'o pa mei := ke'a du ko'a Now you would have a full definition, and we would know that only ko'a satisfies "su'o pa mei", while everything else doesn't. With (D1-7) as is, we know that ko'a satisfies "su'o pa mei" but we have no way of knowing whether anything else does. > For example, suppose that a speaker regards {lo nanba} is >>>> non-individual: >>>> >>>>> ro'oi da poi me lo nanba ku'o su'oi de poi me lo nanba zo'u de me da >>>>> ijenai da me de >>>>> >>>>> That is, the speaker regards a half of {lo nanba} is also {me lo >>>>> nanba}. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Even though there is no individual {lo nanba}, an expression {N mei} >>>>> is available with (D1-7) (D1) (D2) (D3). >>>>> >>>> >>>> No: >>>> >>>> "lo nanba cu su'o pa mei" is true >>>> "lo nanba cu su'o re mei" is true >>>> "lo nanba cu su'o ci mei" is true >>>> >>> >>> I call them {lo nanba xi re} and {lo nanba xi ci} respectively for >>> convenience. >>> >> >> But it's the same "lo nanba"! >> >> lo nanba cu su'o pa mei gi'e su'o re mei gi'e su'o ci mei gi'e ..." is >> true. >> > > > It cannot be true when > (D1-7} lo nanba cu su'o pa mei > is defined to {lo nanba}. > > In the definition > > (D1) lo nanba cu su'o re mei := su'oi da poi me lo nanba ku'o su'oi de poi > me lo nanba zo'u ge da su'o pa mei gi de na me da > > {da su'o pa mei} is true only for the referent of {lo nanba} used in > (D1-7), that is, {lo nanba} itself, and it satisfies {su'o pa mei} > _non-distributively_. The other referents in the domain of {da poi me lo > nanba} do not satisfy {da su'o pa mei}. > With the definition you gave, there's no way of knowing what else besides "lo nanba" will satisfy "su'o pa mei". If you mean something like (D1-8) instead of (D1-7) then yes, "lo nanba cu su'o re mei" will be false, and "lo nanba cu pa mei" will be true. "mi pa mei" will also be false, "mi jo'u do re mei" will be false, and so on. How can you possibly justify a definition like that for these predicates? They end up meaning nothing like "is one", "are two", "are three", and so on. Those definitions, with either (D1-7) or (D1-8), just don't make any sense to me. With (D1-7) it's not even a complete definition. I will stick with these (using "ko'a" as a place-holder): (D0) ko'a su'o pa mei := su'oi da me ko'a (D1) ko'a su'o N mei := su'oi da poi me ko'a ku'o su'oi de poi me ko'a zo'u ge da su'o N-1 mei gi de na me da [N>=2] (D2) ko'a N mei := ko'a su'o N mei gi'e nai su'o N+1 mei [N>=1] (D3) lo PA broda := zo'e noi ke'a PA mei gi'e broda mu'o mi'e xorxes -- 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. --047d7b3a89d6e3c12b04f31d0682 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 2:07 PM, guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>= ; wrote:

You give {su'o pa mei} to all the referent that are individual(s) of a= universe of discourse,

No, not just individuals. Everything= and anything satisfies "su'o pa mei", including any non-indi= viduals that there may be in the universe of discourse..
=A0
while I give {su'o pa mei} to ce= rtain members of it, including non-indiviidual members, not to all.

But why? Why do you want some things= not to satisfy "su'o pa mei" which basically should mean &qu= ot;x1 is/are something(s)"? You still haven't explained why you wa= nt to define "su'o pa mei" in such a particular way. =A0

=A0
Using {ke'a}, our definitions are described as follows:
(D1-7) ko'a su'o pa mei
(D1) ke'a su&= #39;o N mei :=3D su'oi da poi me ke'a ku'o su'oi de poi me = ke'a zo'u ge da su'o N-1 mei gi de na me da
(D2) ke'a N mei =A0:=3D ke'a su'o N mei gi'e nai su'o N= +1 mei=A0
(D3) lo PA broda :=3D zo'e noi ke'a PA mei= gi'e broda

When (D1) and (D2) are appli= ed to a particular sumti, ke'a are replaced with it. As for (D3), ke= 9;a is in noi-clause, and it is already fixed to zo'e, and is not=A0rep= laced with another sumti, of course.=A0

Because (D1-7) defines only for {ko'a}, (D1) (D2) (= D3) are valid only for sumti that involves a referent of {ko'a} such as= {ko'e noi ko'a me ke'a}, {ko'i no'u ko'a jo'u = ko'o} etc. (D1) (D2) (D3) are not used for other sumti unless (D1-7) is= applied to one of the referents that is involved by the sumti.

If D1-7 defines only for ko'a, t= hen it is not necessarily valid for ro'oi da poi me ko'a. You need = "ro'oi da poi me ko'a cu su'o mei" if you want it to = be valid for anything among ko'a. But that won't make it valid for = ko'a jo'u ko'o if something in ko'o is not in ko'a.=A0<= /div>


No.= When (D1-7) defines for {ko'a}, the referent of {ko'a} satisfies {= su'o pa mei} _non-distributively_.=A0
Any other referents that are {me ko'a} do not sat= isfy {su'o pa mei}.

You don= 't know, that's not part of D1-7. If that's what you want, then= you need something like:

(D1-8) ke'a su'o pa mei :=3D ke'a du ko'= ;a

Now you would have a full definition, and we wo= uld know that only ko'a satisfies "su'o pa mei", while ev= erything else doesn't.=A0

With (D1-7) as is, we know that ko'a satisfies &quo= t;su'o pa mei" but we have no way of knowing whether anything else= does.=A0

=A0
=A0 =A0 Fo= r example, suppose that a speaker regards {lo nanba} is non-individual:
ro'oi da poi me lo nanba ku'o su'oi de po= i me lo nanba zo'u de me da ijenai da me de

Th= at is, the speaker regards a half of {lo nanba} is also {me lo nanba}.=A0

Yes.
=A0
Even though there is no individual {lo nanba}, an exp= ression {N mei} is available with (D1-7) (D1) (D2) (D3).

No:

"lo nanba cu su= 'o pa mei" is true
"lo nanba cu su'o re mei" is true
"lo nan= ba cu su'o ci mei" is true

I call them {lo nanba xi re} and {lo nanba xi ci} re= spectively for convenience.

But it's the same "lo nanba= "!=A0

lo nanba cu su'o pa mei gi'e su= 'o re mei gi'e su'o ci mei gi'e ..." is true.=A0


It cannot= be true when=A0
(D1-7} lo nanba cu su'o pa mei
is = defined to {lo nanba}.=A0

In the definition=A0

(D1) lo nanba cu su'o re mei :=3D su'oi da poi = me lo nanba ku'o su'oi de poi me lo nanba zo'u ge da su'o p= a mei gi de na me da

{da su'o pa mei} is true = only for the referent of {lo nanba} used in (D1-7), that is, {lo nanba} its= elf, and it satisfies {su'o pa mei} _non-distributively_. The other ref= erents in the domain of {da poi me lo nanba} do=A0not satisfy {da su'o = pa mei}.

With the definition you gave, there&= #39;s no way of knowing what else besides "lo nanba" will satisfy= "su'o pa mei". If you mean something like (D1-8) instead of = (D1-7) then yes, "lo nanba cu su'o re mei" will be false, and= "lo nanba cu pa mei" will be true. "mi pa mei" will al= so be false, "mi jo'u do re mei" will be false, and so on. Ho= w can you possibly justify a definition like that for these predicates? The= y end up meaning nothing like "is one", "are two", &quo= t;are three", and so on.=A0

Those definitions, with either (D1-7) or (D1-8), just d= on't make any sense to me. With (D1-7) it's not even a complete def= inition.

I will stick with these (using "ko&#= 39;a" as a place-holder):

(D0) ko'a su'o pa mei :=3D su'oi da me ko&#= 39;a
(D1) ko'a su'o N mei :=3D su'oi da poi me k= o'a ku'o su'oi de poi me ko'a zo'u ge da su'o N-1 m= ei gi de na me da =A0[N>=3D2]
(D2) ko'a N mei =A0:=3D ko'a su'o N mei gi'e nai su= 9;o N+1 mei =A0[N>=3D1]=A0
(D3) lo PA broda :=3D zo'e noi = ke'a PA mei gi'e broda

mu'o mi&#= 39;e xorxes

--
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.
--047d7b3a89d6e3c12b04f31d0682--