Received: from mail-pb0-f59.google.com ([209.85.160.59]:62052) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1Wlkml-00064x-0q for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:01:06 -0700 Received: by mail-pb0-f59.google.com with SMTP id uo5sf1119945pbc.24 for ; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:36 -0700 (PDT) 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=UTd8pNwPOVwnUqdWlZ0l1gUiD/zE/ZXvT8MYg4Qpi+0=; b=CdJizM+W8aTgEvh4B2PfaV9nlfdCxQJJg6bsdNsTD0odUfz37sf04mWhsgmEoO2HSC zh3xkPajMU2sahbHsNTEzKQk3BhGcF+4WUwfRIbLVyTT5Bs/CO8hvhHVgVqsGx//C7am KVSi1g+920AfyL0cOdX2WzkMoafr+56nEm8ZjwN5FzmcGC+Ph1O79CsL5eihiEnzpBqq hnUlRLCIcwWtOyVs4plC4k2nQ/wGg2K6f5UfkhC7Zj+y/B5g0KU4gjCYCfblHj4FDwwI Pl+is7Z3oCGdCeyPQVfX9UUu/N+jfcTAxjuwLIZgDTIyDP+5B88PmG7PwCz2wDSulOEF s2CA== X-Received: by 10.50.143.1 with SMTP id sa1mr122592igb.12.1400356836074; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:36 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.62.180 with SMTP id z20ls1038508igr.43.canary; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.42.107.201 with SMTP id e9mr11019420icp.13.1400356835444; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x22b.google.com (mail-vc0-x22b.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22b]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id on5si746291vdb.0.2014.05.17.13.00.35 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:35 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nictytan@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22b as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22b; Received: by mail-vc0-f171.google.com with SMTP id lc6so7885417vcb.30 for ; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.94.146 with SMTP id z18mr1397064vcm.40.1400356835325; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.86.136 with HTTP; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.86.136 with HTTP; Sat, 17 May 2014 13:00:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 16:00:35 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Place structures, linkargs and a bit of FA From: Jacob Errington To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: nictytan@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of nictytan@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::22b as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nictytan@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=001a11c1e9d0ba7fcf04f99dfbd1 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --001a11c1e9d0ba7fcf04f99dfbd1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The idea is that {da tavla lo broda be de} should expand into {su'o da zo'u da tavla zo'e noi su'o de zo'u ke'a de broda} and not into {su'o da su'o de zo'u da tavla zo'e noi ke'a de broda} This fits in with the general principle that logical variables bind to the closest bridi, and lo clauses have implicit bridi introduced by the noi. .i mi'e la tsani mu'o On May 17, 2014 3:37 AM, "la durka" wrote: > I don't understand the related point. Can you give an example? > > El viernes, 16 de mayo de 2014 17:22:16 UTC-4, xorxes escribi=C3=B3: >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Ian Johnson wrote= : >> >>> http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=3DAdvanced_Place_Structure_Manglin= g >>> >>> In short: the former. Note that this is not Word of BPFK, merely Word o= f >>> Tsani (with agreement from several others, myself included). >>> >>> >> That's the reasonable answer, backed up by the parsing structure. >> >> A related point is that quantifiers in a be-argument shouldn't be >> exportable to the main prenex, because they belong to the definition of = the >> new selbri created by "be". This can be used to give a quantifier that >> appears later in the sentence scope over one that appeared earlier, but >> inside a be-argument. >> >> 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/d/optout. > --=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/d/optout. --001a11c1e9d0ba7fcf04f99dfbd1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The idea is that {da tavla lo broda be de} should expand int= o {su'o da zo'u da tavla zo'e noi su'o de zo'u ke'a= de broda} and not into {su'o da su'o de zo'u da tavla zo'e= noi ke'a de broda}

This fits in with the general principle that logical variabl= es bind to the closest bridi, and lo clauses have implicit bridi introduced= by the noi.

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

On May 17, 2014 3:37 AM, "la durka" &l= t;durka42@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't understand the related point. Can you give an = example?

El viernes, 16 de mayo de 2014 17:22:16 UTC-4, xorxes escri= bi=C3=B3:



On Fri, May 16= , 2014 at 3:45 PM, Ian Johnson <blindb...@gmail.com= > wrote:
In short: the former. Note that this is not Word of BPFK, merely = Word of Tsani (with agreement from several others, myself included).


That's the reasonable answer= , backed up by the parsing structure.=C2=A0

A rela= ted point is that quantifiers in a be-argument shouldn't be exportable = to the main prenex, because they belong to the definition of the new selbri= created by "be". This can be used to give a quantifier that appe= ars later in the sentence scope over one that appeared earlier, but inside = a be-argument.=C2=A0

mu'o mi'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/d/optout.

--
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+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--001a11c1e9d0ba7fcf04f99dfbd1--