From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Oct 29 11:20:59 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:20:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N3ZcJ-0006wC-0c for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:20:59 -0700 Received: from narnia.blumen-schwarz.de ([80.190.195.21]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N3ZcC-0006v2-Fq for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:20:58 -0700 Received: from dslb-088-074-057-082.pools.arcor-ip.net ([88.74.57.82] helo=[192.168.20.113]) by narnia.blumen-schwarz.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N3Zc7-0005W9-Mw for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:20:48 +0100 Message-ID: <4AE9DD03.7070401@fastmail.fm> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:20:51 +0100 From: Roman Naumann User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091001) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: xorlo and the expansion of bridi References: <4AE71391.5090501@fastmail.fm> <925d17560910271000j10c5f931ga1f4d12f85c12651@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <925d17560910271000j10c5f931ga1f4d12f85c12651@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: ------------- Start der SpamAssassin Auswertung --------------- Bei Fragen dazu bitte das Forum life.d.cvmx verwenden! Details der Inhaltsanalyse: (-2.6 Punkte, 5.0 benoetigt) -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Nachricht wurde nur über vertrauenswürdige Rechner weitergeleitet 2.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Spamwahrscheinlichkeit nach Bayes-Test: 40-60% [score: 0.5000] -2.8 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list ---------------- Ende der SpamAssassin Auswertung ----------------- X-archive-position: 16412 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: roman_naumann@fastmail.fm Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Thanks for your reply. Jorge Llambías wrote: > (BTW, what does "B dogs exist" mean to you exactly? Is that the number > of dogs alive at the time of the utterance, the number of dogs that > have ever existed or will exist on this planet, or something else, > depending on the context?) I'm not sure what it means, I just remember the 'old' lo implied existential claims. >> expanded to >> {B da poi gerku ku'o A da vasxu}. >> Where A and B are PA. >> >> Is the (without-xorlo-)expansion correct? > > No, you have "B da poi gerku ku'o" as the x1 of vasxu, and "A da" as > the x2. Also, binding the same variable twice doesn't make much sense. Sorry, I forgot the prenex. What I meant to say was: {B da poi gerku zo'u A da vasxu} But still, I don't see why you say the variable is being bound twice. According to the example from CLL:16, it should be locally requantified instead of being bound again: ( 14.1) ci da poi mlatu cu blaci .ije re da cu barda Three Xs which-are cats are white, and two Xs are big. What does Example 14.1 mean? The appearance of ``ci da'' quantifies ``da'' as referring to three things, which are restricted by the relative clause to be cats. When ``re da'' appears later, it refers to two of the those three things --- there is no saying which ones. Further uses of ``da'' alone, if there were any, would refer once more to the three cats, so the requantification of ``da'' is purely local. ) Now, if {B da poi gerku zo'u A da vasxu} is the correct expansion of {A lo B gerku cu vasxu}, does that change with xorlo? >> How does {A lo B gerku cu vasxu} expand with xorlo? > (...) > Or we could put everything in one bridi as: > > A da poi me lo gerku noi klani li B cu vasxu > A of the dogs, which are B in all, breath. I should have been more specific about what kind of expansion I had in mind. The thing I'm looking for is a canonical form of {A lo B cu broda} with a proper prenex. That canonical form should not contain {lo}. (Something a computer could use for doing some logic on it) > But this is not exactly about xorlo, at least not about "lo". This is > how quantifiers work in general. An outer quantifier on any sumti > works the same way: > > A cu broda > = A da poi me cu broda > A of the referents of are broda. Isn't A an _inner_ quantifier here? Without xorlo, there should be {ro} as an implicit outer quantifier. 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.