Return-Path: Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19) id ; Thu, 9 Jul 92 22:10 EDT Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91) id AA08583; Thu, 9 Jul 92 20:29:22 EDT Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA06723; Thu, 9 Jul 92 19:37:42 -0400 Message-Id: <9207092337.AA06723@relay1.UU.NET> Received: from PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU by pucc.Princeton.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5767; Thu, 09 Jul 92 14:19:41 EDT Received: by PUCC (Mailer R2.08 ptf034) id 0270; Thu, 09 Jul 92 14:18:46 EDT Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 18:31:55 BST Reply-To: cbmvax!uunet!oasis.icl.co.uk!I.Alexander.bra0122 Sender: Lojban list From: cbmvax!uunet!OASIS.ICL.CO.UK!I.Alexander.bra0122 Subject: RE: Wallops #8 X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Thu Jul 9 22:10:29 1992 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!CUVMB.BITNET!LOJBAN DATE TIME FROM SUBJECT CODES Mark: > Remember the default quantifier on {da}: {su'opada zo'u}. Unless otherwise > specified, variables are presumed to be existentially quantified. So it > works. Ivan: > Yes, but existential quantification in the scope of negation is the > same as negation in the scope of universal quantification. This is exactly the problem I had with the negation paper, as mentioned in my recent posted Lojban text. My conclusion was that any (implicit or explicit) quantifier(s) need to be exported to the prenex _before_ attempting to analyse any internal negation markers. This seemed to be what the negation paper was saying (modulo the typo), and seemed (to an English speaker like myself) the most natural way of organising things. In which case, the existential quantification is _outside_ the scope of the negation, so it works.