Received: from mail-qa0-f58.google.com ([209.85.216.58]:47810) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XnY6z-0007tL-F8 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:25:29 -0800 Received: by mail-qa0-f58.google.com with SMTP id j7sf969315qaq.13 for ; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:25:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent :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; bh=ISuqztf4rwk8v6RkAzcXs6oSEUIetQ9ARy1+8PoQKwQ=; b=Q6Ir2/q3fJlfJJ9n7qb5rXCME00euqQw5g+uwC+9/Pa79N1jQRVqJuUNijguBSv+NH mXT45k9GhKuqfZ+5Lazwghs8IeESFZo9hAG1W4v5i/j85vNraZQlEQAyGleBmJbVE3hr OjBfL1b+Crxm25zPquwbspea0tSJWsAlpiWu3allT75RE2BWyENyVF/qUL5enrhfV1TF RIkuqxIsZJngI5zxaz8tWVD4NCPo/t3rNTlF3C97whwi80/FC5nIfc3mTIMkXdworOO+ n59ZlKQGG9mRpqQ7iFAMOhDRf2Q053FA3CSLVwUC8tMS8YHzoeFZPnbxuPf7A5uonqXB et4g== X-Received: by 10.182.108.161 with SMTP id hl1mr37127obb.9.1415561114961; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:25:14 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.182.55.69 with SMTP id q5ls585758obp.45.gmail; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:25:13 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.182.27.193 with SMTP id v1mr21338557obg.40.1415561003671; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:23:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.24]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k9si804538pdo.0.2014.11.09.11.23.23 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:23:23 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: none (google.com: mbays@sdf.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=192.94.73.24; Received: from thegonz.net (d24-141-9-29.home.cgocable.net [24.141.9.29]) (authenticated (0 bits)) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.8/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sA9JNKEI019987 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO) for ; Sun, 9 Nov 2014 19:23:21 GMT Received: from martin by thegonz.net with local (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XnY41-0000Sp-G9 for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 14:22:17 -0500 Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 14:22:17 -0500 From: Martin Bays To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2 Message-ID: <20141109192217.GH8588@gonzales> References: <20141108220257.GA31242@gonzales> <20141108232204.GB31242@gonzales> <20141109145940.GA8588@gonzales> <20141109154145.GC8588@gonzales> <20141109161417.GE8588@gonzales> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dMyqICaxQaaUjrCL" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6 X-cunselcu'a-valsi: fonxa User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-Original-Sender: mbays@sdf.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: mbays@sdf.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=mbays@sdf.org 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: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - --dMyqICaxQaaUjrCL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Sunday, 2014-11-09 at 13:45 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas : > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Martin Bays wrote: >=20 > > But maybe with this analogy I see what you're getting at. Is it that: > > considering {lo nu broda cu balvi lo nu brode} where the {lo} are taken > > to get kinds, > > to determine whether this is true at time t, > > you look for instances of the kinds, i.e. actual events, somewhere near > > time t, and somehow pick out a pair (e1,e2), > > and finally return the truth value of balvi(e1,e2) > > (which since e1 and e2 are now actual events, doesn't depend on t) > > ? >=20 > > Is that what you mean? So kind of hiding the quantificational structure > > by delegating it to a semantics of kinds? >=20 > Sounds about right. OK. This seems like a rather baroque solution! What's the advantage of adding this layer of indirection? One thing which seems like a clear disadvantage to me: e.g. in this example ca ro nu mi xagji kei mi klama lo zarci .e ba bo lo zdani -> ca ro nu mi xagji kei ko'a fasnu .i ko'a nu ge ko'e fasnu gi ko'i fa= snu .i ko'i nu ko'o balvi ko'e .i ko'e nu mi klama lo zarci .i ko'o nu mi klama lo zdani , there's still no specific indication that the instance of ko'e witnessing {ko'e fasnu} is the same as the instance of {ko'e} witnessing {ko'o balvi ko'e}. The only connection is that they're both meant to happen at around the same time. So this still doesn't give the meaning I believe the original sentence has. Martin --dMyqICaxQaaUjrCL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlRfvukACgkQULC7OLX7LNZ85ACbBbb0FaQ0WdIz9Phxzo+hG8MX 6UUAoKIDOsXxrlk2uoVbs33EEHWEIqZa =uLhc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dMyqICaxQaaUjrCL--