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 m0qlnIJ-00005LC; Sat, 17 Sep 94 03:06 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0668; Sat, 17 Sep 94 03:04:52 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0665; Sat, 17 Sep 1994 03:04:51 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3316; Sat, 17 Sep 1994 02:03:40 +0200 Date: Fri, 16 Sep 1994 20:06:38 EDT Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: TECH: Any old thing whatsoever (was RE: do djica loi ckafi je'i X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1695 Lines: 45 > Back to present, Mark Shoulson reporting. > > That said, it looks to me like there may be more than one thing at work > here. On the one hand, things like "I like tennis"" or "I like women" > should use "loi". Agreed. > But "I need a box" (and possibly tho not necessarily I need a taxi) may be > different, since you're not referring in general... precisely because *NOT* > "any of" the mass will do. I think I may be changing my mind. What confused me was the quantification of loi as "part of the mass of..." {mi nitcu loi tanxe} could well mean that the _whole_ mass of boxes is such that I need it, and since the properties of the individuals are also the properties of the mass, then as long as I need one of them I need the whole mass. Actually, there isn't one box such that I need it, but the mass has more properties than each individual, so we'd still be ok. > A full box won't help you. Ormaybe "lei" will > help there. I dunno.. It doesn't matter. You're saying that the mass of boxes has the property that you need it, not that the components of that mass have the property. This makes me wonder what's the point of quantifying {loi} with anything other than {piro}, since anything that is true for one quantification should be true for any other. So {mi nitcu piro loi tanxe} might make sense for "I need a box", but is very counterintuitive. The new problem is that "I need a box" doesn't mean that I need any box whatsoever. Maybe I need a big box, in which case "I need a box" is true, but "I need any box whatsoever" is not. And I don't think {lei} helps, it's not a matter of specific boxes... > For consideration... Enough for today, I'm going home. Jorge