From cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN Tue Mar 24 08:58:48 1992 Return-Path: Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19) id ; Tue, 24 Mar 92 08:58 EST Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91) id AA28678; Tue, 24 Mar 92 06:09:43 EST Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA12488; Tue, 24 Mar 92 05:14:46 -0500 Message-Id: <9203241014.AA12488@relay1.UU.NET> Received: from PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU by pucc.Princeton.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8455; Tue, 24 Mar 92 05:14:07 EST Received: by PUCC (Mailer R2.08 ptf012) id 4285; Tue, 24 Mar 92 05:13:06 EST Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1992 20:55:26 GMT Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski Sender: Lojban list From: Ivan A Derzhanski Subject: A pair of how-do-i-say-it's X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann In-Reply-To: CJ FINE's message of Mon, 23 Mar 92 19:48:21 GMT <27569.9203231948@mail.bradford.ac.uk> Status: RO Now I'll be damned. Here I see Colin doing something very strange - seeking a way to say something non-trivial, even if it is not true. What's going on? > From: CJ FINE > Date: Mon, 23 Mar 92 19:48:21 GMT > > I think the problem is mostly with the existential quantifier, and > partly with the choice of logical connective. And partly with the analogy between objects and predicates being false. > <...> if you say > > robu'a zo'u la buc. bu'a .ubu sy. .ijo la meidjr. bu'a la britn > for all relationships P, P(GB,US) if and only if P(JM,UK) (By the way, UK includes Great Britain _and_ Northern Ireland.) Facts: president( GB, US) = true prime_minister( GB, US) = false president( JM, UK) = false prime_minister( JM, UK) = true q := lambda t lambda (x, y) [x has lived in y for t years] N1 := the number of years GB has spent in US N2 := the number of years JM has spent in UK q( N1)( GB, US) = true q( N1)( JM, UK) = false q( N2)( GB, US) = false q( N2)( JM, UK) = true and so on. That existential quantifier doesn't work. > You get something which is not strictly true, but is essentially what > you were trying to capture. Since it is not true, it can't be what we're trying to capture. The English sentence `GB is to US what JM is to UK' is painfully illogical. Trying to put it into logic won't work. Ivan