Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #14) id m0pWAI7-0000PeC; Mon, 14 Feb 94 22:53 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1371; Mon, 14 Feb 94 22:52:03 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 1368; Mon, 14 Feb 1994 22:52:02 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9306; Mon, 14 Feb 1994 21:51:03 +0100 Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 15:45:33 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: TECH: Quantifiers (was: cukta) X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199402142016.AA26159@nfs1.digex.net> from Content-Length: 2214 Lines: 66 la xorxes. cusku di'e > > This brings up a (totally unrelated) question that I made myself some time > > ago, and I had forgotten about it. > > > {ro lo klama} means the same as {ro lo klama be ?ma} > > > Is {zo'e} the right answer? la i,n. cusku di'e > I think it has to be - I agree. > but this raises in my mind the question of the meaning > of constructions such as {lo klama be ro da} and {lo klama be da}, > or conversely how you talk about "all goers, irrespective of destination". > How does the quantification work inside a description? > > I suppose {lo klama be ro da} must be one who goes to every destination, > and {lo klama be da}, assuming {da} is currently unbound, is one who goes > to some destination (no matter which). So the {da} becomes implicitly > bound *inside* the description, and {ro klama be da} are the members of > the set {x: exists(y): klama(x,y,...)}. I think this is all entirely correct, PROVIDED that you keep in mind the fundamental difference between "standard" quantifier scope and Lojban quantifier scope. First of all, there are no free variables in Lojban: all are quantified as soon as they appear. The default quantification is existential. (This makes Lojban transcriptions of Prolog annoying.) The scope of a quantified variable extends from: the most recent place where a "prenex" grammatical construct could have occurred, viz. the innermost relative clause, abstraction, GEK-GIK-connected subsentence, main sentence, TUhE-TUhU supersentence, or whole text containing the variable; or: the most recent appearance of this variable with an explicit quantifier prepended; up to: the appearance of an "appropriate" number of NIhO cmavo, where "appropriate" is usually 1-2 but may depend on context; or: a single "da'o" cmavo, which cancels all bindings; or: another appearance of the same variable with explicit quantifier prepended. It follows from these rules that Lojban is "fully alpha-converted": there are no inner-scope rebindings. -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.