From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Sep 29 00:42:03 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MsXLX-0007iF-2c for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:42:03 -0700 Received: from web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.118]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MsXLT-0007hp-OR for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:42:02 -0700 Received: (qmail 70236 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Sep 2009 07:41:53 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=zxxZHME9NhFcFqBDIWVuFDUWhdP2fSvxPIUGZCmIhuYJynfCYIOm0f2evGZroar6XAjUAJ4432G9u55w8/40yoKCFChM7QKSRzcaRM/K1/Cqlr35Epoh1j7k266QBt8J1M0kd1Z2PFYVuTl1uTjw72xfnT5IGO8AA8UmLJxjT7o=; Message-ID: <391271.68882.qm@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: ShPqeOUVM1kPPEvfC_Iz8eFsmPzr3aljXt5KhyUJFhXOPiDT86DVW2GOdYSkoVzdY3eFxL7SGZpKeTcJzFaUT3PCnQ76KujX0qOsLfFM6JBfaSB7ubzjWF7JK3R8Z9flOTyOoQVJp2LbAroFsUuHhk6l7NnR65xtmhHoWLuCWqWt_KgvNVE8lcjHw6wOOWk8voyLOLfABI3FcMj4j4hjQ.H0tSlqP6fyB6eudiPZMSICGb3u6pZu9H7zzil3ex0Fi9jN8cjY9lcbOeqNJnW4OTmS60R.gaOPfZLcFAHCpuf0eA_ktv55M3h1AtZVcBUfKMYb2xPfw9GEuDg7jXyugHTgLujTzx9Q.8QB37oKZewMgf29rzrcSCIjE1TeN.SvxmGPbQ-- Received: from [86.43.69.220] by web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:41:53 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/157.18 YahooMailWebService/0.7.347.3 References: Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:41:53 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: Translating "even" To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1712619085-1254210113=:68882" X-archive-position: 16261 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --0-1712619085-1254210113=:68882 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Standard logic crap from fifty years ago now: John liked it.=A0 Everyone el= se liked it.=A0 It is sueprising that John liked it (John does not usually = like things of this sort).=A0=A0 =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A___________________________= _____=0AFrom: "MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com" = =0ATo: lojban-list@lojban.org=0ASent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:02:14 A= M=0ASubject: [lojban] Re: Translating "even"=0A=0AIn a message dated 9/28/2= 009 23:58:18 Eastern Daylight Time, get.oren@gmail.com writes: =0A=0A=0A=0A= 'Even two people can't move it, how could just you alone?' =0A>or =0A>'She = wasn't even awake, let alone concerned.' =0A>=0A=0AHere are my attempts at = paraphrasing these two utterances. =0A1) Since two people aren't enough to = move it, (surprise!) how could fewer people (or one person) do it? =0A=0AOr= generalizing: Even X can't Y, so how could less-than-X Y? (or in cases of = opposite extreme: ... how could more-than-X Y?) =0ASince X is insufficient = for Y to be true, it's surprising and doubtful that less than X would be su= fficient for Y to be true. =0A=0A2) (#2 also contains the idiom "let alone"= , which should be dealt with separately.) =0AShe was not awake, but she wou= ld have to be awake in order for her to be concerned. =0A=0AA necessary con= dition of being concerned is being awake. =A0This necessary condition is no= t met so there can be no question of being concerned. =0AY requires X. X is= not true, so Y is not true. =0A=0AComments? =0A=0Amu'o mi'e stevon =0A=0A= =0A --0-1712619085-1254210113=:68882 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Standard logic crap from fifty years ago now: John lik= ed it.  Everyone else liked it.  It is sueprising that John liked= it (John does not usually like things of this sort).  
=0A

=0A
=0A
=0AFrom: "MorphemeAddict@w= mconnect.com" <MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:02:14 AM<= BR>Subject: [lojban] Re: Tr= anslating "even"

= In a message dated 9/28/2009 23:58:18 Eastern Daylight Time, get.oren@gmail= .com writes:


=0A
'Even two people can't move it, how could just you alone?'
or
'She= wasn't even awake, let alone concerned.'


Here are= my attempts at paraphrasing these two utterances.
1) Since two people = aren't enough to move it, (surprise!) how could fewer people (or one person= ) do it?

Or generalizing: Even X can't Y, so how could less-than-X = Y? (or in cases of opposite extreme: ... how could more-than-X Y?)
Sinc= e X is insufficient for Y to be true, it's surprising and doubtful that les= s than X would be sufficient for Y to be true.

2) (#2 also contains= the idiom "let alone", which should be dealt with separately.)
She was= not awake, but she would have to be awake in order for her to be concerned= .

A necessary condition of being concerned is being awake.  Th= is necessary condition is not met so there can be no question of being concerned.
Y requires X. = X is not true, so Y is not true.

Comments?

mu'o mi'e stevon=

=0A=0A --0-1712619085-1254210113=:68882-- 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.