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 m0qkgKQ-00005XC; Wed, 14 Sep 94 01:27 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2386; Wed, 14 Sep 94 01:26:27 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2382; Wed, 14 Sep 1994 01:26:26 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9992; Wed, 14 Sep 1994 00:25:15 +0200 Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 16:28:19 -0600 Reply-To: Randall Holmes Sender: Lojban list From: Randall Holmes Subject: Re: TECH: RE: do djica loi ckafi je'i tcati To: cbogart@CSN.ORG Cc: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@idbsu.idbsu.edu Content-Length: 919 Lines: 17 This seems only to go to you via my reply function, and I don't know how to e-mail the whole list; I'll try to do this in the cc: line at the end of this message. The same problem arises in TLI Loglan; the paradigmatic example which caused a lot of discussion was "I am waiting for a taxi". The difficulty seems to be that the logical form of the sentence is an illusion; there is no box referred to in "I need a box", and there is no taxi referred to in "I am waiting for a taxi" (there need not even exist any boxes or taxis meeting your requirements for the statement to be true). The context is "referentially opaque", in Quine's terminology, and the object of the sentence, if it has one, is some kind of "intensional" object (something on the order of a concept of a box or taxi). --Randall Holmes ("logician in residence", TLI)