Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 13 Oct 1993 16:48:58 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 13 Oct 1993 16:47:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199310132047.AA08636@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6336; Wed, 13 Oct 93 16:45:45 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 0127; Wed, 13 Oct 93 16:48:39 EDT Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1993 19:33:03 +0100 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: Lean Lujvo and fat gismu X-To: lojban@cuvma.BITNET To: Erik Rauch In-Reply-To: (Your message of Wed, 13 Oct 93 13:16:42 A.) Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Wed Oct 13 20:33:03 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Iain says: > Hang on! If an omitted sumti defaulted to {da}, then this sort > or reasoning might be relevant. But it doesn't, it defaults to {zo'e}, > whose quantification is indeterminate. "X is not blue" means > "There exists a Y such that X is not bluer than Y". Suppose I said > "X is not bluer than ko'a". If {ko'a} had been previously defined, > there would be no problem. If not, then I still see no reason to think > it's existentially quantified. And {zo'e} means whatever I want it > to mean. :-) Are you sure this is how negation works? I thought that "X is not blue" would mean "There is no X such that there is some Y such that X is bluer than Y". Or do you mean that "X is not blue" means "There exists a Y such that X is not bluer than Y" *if* (contrary to fact) _blanu_ is "x1 is bluer than x2"? (In which case I understand you & agree.) ---- And KO JBOBANPEHO