From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Jul 19 08:39:56 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 19 Jul 2006 08:39:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G3E9C-0007E5-1S for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 08:39:38 -0700 Received: from web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.120]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G3E99-0007Du-UU for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 08:39:37 -0700 Received: (qmail 37235 invoked by uid 60001); 19 Jul 2006 15:39:34 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=H1Vhr1RdBZGRCbOqbv5sDLfPwzWhmkMRs6nuQfTFSa+oFa76Z7zTrSZwkC3Oryefjgqad5exvCHueAGFAEKLpuwMZ2AIDDVvR1el+4CQqpjt/PNTjufG+Oq+JH8Mdi3n+v+El7ai/R0hvsJ3ieLXUWe+jNvj4wrejRZQZt85yro= ; Message-ID: <20060719153934.37233.qmail@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [70.237.215.206] by web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 08:39:34 PDT Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 08:39:34 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: A (rather long) discussion of {all} To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <925d17560607190825t35c8d3c8yc165f9e6a5027c12@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-archive-position: 12247 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 I guess I don't see why d-truth implies c-truth; that was certainly not the intentio. Where did I slip up? --- Jorge Llamb�as wrote: > On 7/19/06, John E Clifford wrote: > > Interesting. I haven't thought about what to do with numerical quantifiers yet -- they don't > > arise for the present problem, which is just singular vs. plural. > > I didn't really mean to bring in numerical quantifiers in any significant way. > Remove them and the same question arises: "the boys carried the chairs > to the garden" cannot be split into only two cases, d and c, to evaluate its > truth. (Or if it can, then d-true would always entail c-true, so > defining "true" > as distinct from "c-true" would seem pointless.) > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if > you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help. > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.