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 #1) id m0qlrGo-00005LC; Sat, 17 Sep 94 07:21 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2615; Sat, 17 Sep 94 07:19:32 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2611; Sat, 17 Sep 1994 07:19:29 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0135; Sat, 17 Sep 1994 06:17:43 +0200 Date: Sat, 17 Sep 1994 00:15:53 -0400 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: TECH: RE: do djica loi ckafi je'i tcati X-To: cbogart@csn.org X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1950 Lines: 44 CB>But suppose I need a huge box to put my house in. No such box exists. I CB>can look disapprovingly at my big, unboxed, house, and say "I need a box", CB>but it would be wrong to say "da poi pa tanxe zo'u: mi nitce da", which CB>claims not only that I need a box, but that such a box already exists! OK. This now looks somewhat familiar. "lo iunikorno does NOT claim that unicorns exist, merely that if such a thing exists, I am referring to one (nonspecific) member of the set that has such properties. That set may be the empty set (and there is some funny truth value stuff involved when that happens, but I think John C. and pc workewd it out so that statements about descriptions that are met only by the empty set are still meaningful and useful. "lo tanxe" is NOT the same thing as "da poi tanxe"; likewise "pa tanxe is NOT the same as "pa da poi tanxe". Thus it is improper to export the quantifier to the prenex as you did in: CB>The discussion hinges on the fact that all lojban sumti can be quantified CB>in the prenex without any change in meaning. "mi nitce pa tanxe" means CB>the same as "da poi pa tanxe zo'u: mi nitce da". I.e. There's a box out CB>there somewhere, and I need it. It implies there is some box in CB>existence, and you're saying that you need that particular box. (You wanted: pada poi tanxe zo'u mi nitcu da which is the same as mi nitcu da poi tanxe but not necessarilt the same as mi nitcu pa [lo] tanxe ) Now "mi nitcu pa tanxe", which is NOT restricted, does say that ANY member of the (unrestricted) set of things that 'are boxes' will satisfy your need. If you want a box for the house, you MUST restrict the set: mi nitcu pa tanxe poi [ka'e] vasru le zdani dinju I need 1 of the (hypothetical) boxes that is innately capable of containing the nest-building (that I have in mind). Only if I am incorrect in remebering what the bottom line of "lo" was, does my argument fail. lojbab