From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Apr 08 10:34:17 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:34:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44)
	id 1DJxMv-0001Ph-9P
	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:34:09 -0700
Received: from web81303.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.78])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.44)
	id 1DJxMr-0001P2-Os
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:34:09 -0700
Message-ID: <20050408173334.49345.qmail@web81303.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [65.69.48.37] by web81303.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:33:34 PDT
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Hintikka on Quantifier Scope
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: 6667
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
X-archive-position: 9790
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


--- 2 = 3 <xod@thestonecutters.net> wrote:
> John E Clifford wrote:
> 
> >I seem to recall something like this
> >was proposed once a long while ago using
> modified
> >Skolem functions in place of particular
> >quantifiers (and eventually groups -- bunches
> --
> >for value to make the numeric cases work). 
> >
> 
> It would be interesting to see the Skolem
> function proposal.
> 
> Loglan (!) gets round the issue by explicitly
> declaring the mapping, if 
> I recall correctly.
> 
I wonder if the proposal was not back in the
Loglan days; I can't find it in any Lojban
material I can search.  When I try to reconstruct
it, the plan that feels most familiar has a cmavo
sumti which takes subordinate arguments of the
variables or whatnot that govern it, on the order
of {foo be da bei gy (referring back lo gerku}
bei ko'a} and so on.  But I have no guarantee
that this faithfully reproduces the proposal (or,
come to that, that the proposal does not exist
only in my nonveridical memory).