From lojbab Fri Sep 23 10:45:37 1994 Received: from access2.digex.net by nfs1.digex.net with SMTP id AA02980 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 23 Sep 1994 10:45:33 -0400 Received: by access2.digex.net id AA05018 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for lojbab); Fri, 23 Sep 1994 10:46:40 -0400 From: Logical Language Group Message-Id: <199409231446.AA05018@access2.digex.net> Subject: Re: Analogy To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 10:46:39 -0400 (EDT) Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net (Logical Language Group) In-Reply-To: <199409230129.AA24383@nfs1.digex.net> from "Jorge Llambias" at Sep 22, 94 08:08:22 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24beta] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2860 Status: RO la rendl. xolmyz. cusku di'e > > So what is the official line? Does it coincide with the interpretation > > using implicit quantification or does it reverse it? If it reverses it, > > I really do suggest that you change it. la xorxes. cusku di'e > If it had been decided, there probably would be an example in the > connectives paper, so I suppose the issue had not come up before. > I agree that the order you propose seems best, but how do you handle > cases like: > > da prami la djan e la djeimyz > Someone loves John and James > > la djan e la djeimyz se prami da > John and James are loved by someone There is as yet no "official" line, or it would be in the reference grammar. I do recognize the problem, but I haven't worked out what the answer should be. When I get the chance, I'll review all the comments on this (and the other pending questions): right now, I've been suddenly swamped at work after a long fallow period. Jorge, it is already the case that conversion with SE can change meanings in the presence of quantified variables, since variables are quantified in the order of surface appearance: 1) ro prenu cu prami pa finpe all persons love one fish and 2) pa finpe cu se prami ro prenu one fish is-loved-by all persons are equivalent respectively to 3) ro da poi prenu pa de poi finpe zo'u da prami de for-all x's which are-persons, there-is-one y which is-a-fish, such-that x loves y and 4) pa de poi finpe ro da poi prenu zo'u de se prami da there-is-one y which is-a-fish for-all x's which are-persons such-that y is-loved-by x and the latter is equivalent in turn to: 5) pa de poi finpe ro da poi prenu zo'u da prami de which is not equivalent to Ex. 3, so Ex. 1 and 2 are not equivalent either. This will be explained properly in the predicate logic paper. (TLI) Loglan translations for Randall: "cusku" = "cutse". "di'e" has no exact equivalent, but belongs to the same family as your "toa" and "toi", but refers futureward; in English, "the following remark". 1) ra pernu ga cluva ne ficli 2) ne ficli ga nu cluva ra pernu 3) ra ba jio pernu ne be jio ficli goi ba cluva be 4) ne be jio ficli ra ba jio pernu goi be nu cluva ba 5) ne be jio ficli ra ba jio pernu goi ba cluva be On your name: Lojban has no "h", but "x" is the usual alternative; "x" is a full-fledged Lojban consonant. "mz" is a forbidden consonant cluster, as it is easily confused with "nz" (at least, that is the official rationale -- I don't consider this rule very well motivated), so I inserted a "y" hyphen. > Do you propose that they have different meanings? I think that in > Lojban they both mean the same thing. I don't know the answer, but there is no >a priori< reason why they should. -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.