Received: from mail-wi0-f183.google.com ([209.85.212.183]:61727) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YNhEx-0007o3-Nw for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:27:05 -0800 Received: by mail-wi0-f183.google.com with SMTP id hi2sf5366376wib.0 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -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 :content-type: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=ujOAaxm1jSRlFWkYTN6aX19LEFW9E8hck6DebAUtUUU=; b=FgpydUKGykqcFXe+anP2GeB00i829ryyYCZ8djhWB1k96YMBSncdppnehGVruWSM7R x3Bx0zIbGNSEp3tpAZ/mt52zZ/Ne1+mpByvyZrilQdA3acUY87oEuPWsg2zLhY+VaChg vtcnTiNochcX5jy+QXjgRHwkuqzMXvUVb3n9Mu4MDi/tLpkt2YWhXbfrFi9aA5PTyJkt ZDrp7v8jECt/iDXoVdNyYJl706BjWtYIgIrdw4NI49kt+M+/AxfJMbLME+JrZExihYKB so+EbXYDCHy+vtbT+6Ge8VDembOhvfZewj6jwqswVJUouf6hRdQqNBdWFxcYc4gBXg8W VJcw== X-Received: by 10.180.39.75 with SMTP id n11mr182609wik.9.1424176003805; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.14.137 with SMTP id p9ls177820wic.42.gmail; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.201.10 with SMTP id jw10mr3556077wjc.3.1424176003180; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wg0-x22d.google.com (mail-wg0-x22d.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o3si3608583wib.2.2015.02.17.04.26.43 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::22d; Received: by mail-wg0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id k14so31996090wgh.4 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.12.233 with SMTP id b9mr55547171wic.49.1424176003064; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.27.56.20 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 04:26:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 09:26:43 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] BPFK Section: Non-logical Connectives From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c24114c2a949050f47d066 X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::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: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_bar: - --001a11c24114c2a949050f47d066 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:24 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: > > 2015-02-17 2:31 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : >> >> >> I think when discussing "joi" it's useful to bear in mind it has (at >> least) two different definitions (as does "loi"): >> >> (joi1) ko'a joi ko'e =3D lo gunma be ko'a jo'u ko'e >> (joi2) ko'a joi ko'e =3D ko'a jo'u ko'e + indication that when this sumt= i >> is used as the argument of a predicate, the predicate should not distrib= ute >> over the referents of the sumti. >> > > So {joi2} is for "plural" non-distributive sumti variable type, {jo'u} is > for distributive and {je/.e} is for vague? > No, "jo'u" is not (necessarily) distributive. And ".e" is shortcut for a sentence connective, so of course it has to be distributive. But distributiviy is not really a property of a sumti, it's a property of a tersu'i. If "ko'a broda" entails "ro ko'a broda", then broda1 is distributive. This doesn't mean that "ko'a" is distributive, it means broda1 is distributive. Asking whether "ko'a jo'u ko'e" is distributive or not is like asking whether "ko'a" is distributive. The question doesn't really make sense. "ko'a jo'u ko'e" is just like "ko'a" or like "ko'e", it's something with referents. What any predicate says about those referents is not up to "jo'u". "ko'a .e ko'e broda" is completely different, because it's a shortcut notation for ""ko'a broda .ije ko'e broda". "ko'a .e ko'e" doesn't mean much by itself since ".e", like all logical connectives, needs a selbri to work with. That's why "joi2" is weird, "ko'a joi2 ko'e" creates a new sumti with all the referents of "ko'a" and "ko'e", but then it also wants to tell us how these referents will be treated by anything predicated about them. If you say "ko'i goi ko'a jo'u ko'e" and "ko'o goi ko'a joi ko'e", I'm not sure if "ko'i" and "ko'o" are any different. They have the exact same referents, but does "ko'o" carry also the information that it can only be used with a non-distributive predicate? May be instead use {joi} for {joi1} only and use {ce} for {joi2}? > I think both "joi1" and "joi2" are pretty useless, so I don't have an opinion on that. If it was up to me I would forget about both those uses and reserve "joi" for "jo'u", which is the more basic and needed one. > I don't think usage can help here. Most of it would probably be wrong > usage. > Yes, usage is probably all over the place. "Masses" have also been used to make other distinctions besides emergent entity (joi1) and non-distributivity (joi2), so this is only part of the mess, but this affects "loi" more than "joi", since the "loi djacu" sense doesn't really have a proper counterpart in "joi". > However, I think that BPFK should strictly specify the meaning of {joi} o= r > even better to specify to how to express plural type ("set") like casnu1, > simxu1, how to express masses (if needed), and distributivity. > All sumti are plural by default. If singular reference is significant it has to be specified as a special case, for example attaching "noi pa mei" to the sumti, or with an explicit inner "pa" in a description. In general Lojban doesn't mark number. casnu1 and simxu1 are tersu'i, not sumti, so it's up to the definition of the predicate to specify what it says about its arguments. I think for example that casnu1 can be filled with a single entity consisting of people ("lo (pa) kamni cu casnu") or about many entities each of whom is a person ("lo (so'i) prenu cu casnu") and both are acceptable. "Mass" means so many different things in Lojban-speak that before deciding how to express them we need to specify what we are talking about. One of them is "lo gunma be", "a group consisting of". Distributivity is done with "ro": "ro ko'a broda" says that each of the referents of "ko'a" satisfies "broda" by itself. "ko'a .e ko'e broda" is short for "ko'a broda .i je ko'e broda". With (joi1) "ko'a joi ko'e" refers to a single entity that has two >> constituents. In this case there's no point in talking about distributiv= ity >> since there's only one thing involved, so nothing to distribute. >> > > I think masses ({lo gunma}) and non-distributive sumti variable type are > different things and should not be reconciled in one connective. > Indeed. In fact neither of them should be done with connectives. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=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. --001a11c24114c2a949050f47d066 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:24 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <<= a href=3D"mailto:gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gleki.is.my.= name@gmail.com> wrote:
2015-02-17 2:31 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <<= a href=3D"mailto:jjllambias@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">jjllambias@gmail.c= om>:

I think when discussing = "joi" it's useful to bear in mind it has (at least) two diffe= rent definitions (as does "loi"):

(joi1)= ko'a joi ko'e =3D lo gunma be ko'a jo'u ko'e=C2=A0
(joi2) ko'a joi ko'e =3D ko'a jo'u ko'e + indica= tion that when this sumti is used as the argument of a predicate, the predi= cate should not distribute over the referents of the sumti.

So {joi2} is for "plur= al" non-distributive sumti variable type, {jo'u} is for distributi= ve and {je/.e} is for vague?

<= /div>
No, "jo'u" is not (necessarily) distributive. And &= quot;.e" is shortcut for a sentence connective, so of course it has to= be distributive.

But distributiviy is not really = a property of a sumti, it's a property of a tersu'i. If "ko= 9;a broda" entails "ro ko'a broda", then broda1 is distr= ibutive. This doesn't mean that "ko'a" is distributive, i= t means broda1 is distributive.

Asking whether &qu= ot;ko'a jo'u ko'e" is distributive or not is like asking w= hether "ko'a" is distributive. The question doesn't reall= y make sense. "ko'a jo'u ko'e" is just like "ko&= #39;a" or like "ko'e", it's something with referents= . What any predicate says about those referents is not up to "jo'u= ". =C2=A0

"ko'a .e ko'e broda&qu= ot; is completely different, because it's a shortcut notation for "= ;"ko'a broda .ije ko'e broda". "ko'a .e ko'e= " doesn't mean much by itself since ".e", like all logic= al connectives, needs a selbri to work with.

That&= #39;s why "joi2" is weird, "ko'a joi2 ko'e" cre= ates a new sumti with all the referents of "ko'a" and "k= o'e", but then it also wants to tell us how these referents will b= e treated by anything predicated about them. If you say "ko'i goi = ko'a jo'u ko'e" and "ko'o goi ko'a joi ko'= ;e", I'm not sure if "ko'i" and "ko'o"= are any different. They have the exact same referents, but does "ko&#= 39;o" carry also the information that it can only be used with a non-d= istributive predicate?=C2=A0

May be instead use {joi} for {joi1} only and use {ce} for {joi2}?

I think both "joi= 1" and "joi2" are pretty useless, so I don't have an opi= nion on that. If it was up to me I would forget about both those uses and r= eserve "joi" for "jo'u", which is the more basic an= d needed one.
=C2=A0
I don&#= 39;t think usage can help here. Most of it would probably be wrong usage.

Yes, usage is probab= ly all over the place. "Masses" have also been used to make other= distinctions besides emergent entity (joi1) and non-distributivity (joi2),= so this is only part of the mess, but this affects "loi" more th= an "joi", since the "loi djacu" sense doesn't reall= y have a proper counterpart in "joi".
=C2=A0
However, I think that BPFK should strictly speci= fy the meaning of {joi} or even better to specify to how to express plural = type ("set") like casnu1, simxu1, how to express masses (if neede= d), and distributivity.

=
All sumti are plural by default. If singular reference is significant = it has to be specified as a special case, for example attaching "noi p= a mei" to the sumti, or with an explicit inner "pa" in a des= cription. In general Lojban doesn't mark number. casnu1 and simxu1 are = tersu'i, not sumti, so it's up to the definition of the predicate t= o specify what it says about its arguments. I think for example that casnu1= can be filled with a single entity consisting of people ("lo (pa) kam= ni cu casnu") or about many entities each of whom is a person ("l= o (so'i) prenu cu casnu") and both are acceptable. "Mass"= ; means so many different things in Lojban-speak that before deciding how t= o express them we need to specify what we are talking about. One of them is= "lo gunma be", "a group consisting of". Distributivity= is done with "ro": "ro ko'a broda" says that each = of the referents of "ko'a" satisfies "broda" by its= elf. "ko'a .e ko'e broda" is short for "ko'a bro= da .i je ko'e broda".

With (joi1) "ko'a joi ko'= ;e" refers to a single entity that has two constituents. In this case = there's no point in talking about distributivity since there's only= one thing involved, so nothing to distribute.

I think masses ({lo gunma}) and non-dist= ributive sumti variable type =C2=A0are different things and should not be r= econciled in one connective.

<= /div>
Indeed. In fact neither of them should be done with connectives.<= /div>

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+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.
--001a11c24114c2a949050f47d066--