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 m0rBqu2-00007EC; Sun, 27 Nov 94 23:12 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4863; Sun, 27 Nov 94 23:13:11 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4860; Sun, 27 Nov 1994 23:13:10 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4519; Sun, 27 Nov 1994 22:09:55 +0100 Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 16:14:55 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: lohe, lehe & ka X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 2054 Lines: 47 > If you agree that "lohe" works as a kind of default universal quantifier > (i.e. not falsified by exceptions), and you still think "lohe" will > serve for your "xehe", then I would be glad to go along with you > for the time being. Not only not falsified by exceptions, but not even required to be verified by a single instance. The claim with {lo'e}, at least the part relating to it, is not necessarily instantiatable. {lo'e cinfa cu xabju la afrikas} claims nothing about particular instances of lions. > But I foresee problems: "I'm looking for a book (to prop open the > door with". If you use "mi sisku lohe cukta", I would interpret > this as implying "every average unexceptional nondeviant book is > sought by me". I wouldn't. For me it doesn't claim anything about any particular instance of book. You would then interpret it as a claim about myriads of events, one for each unexceptional book? Also, to exclude not-useful-for-the-purpose books I'd say {mi sisku le'e cukta}, which means any book within reason. (Or a generic book with the in-mind restrictions I'm imposing.) > But this is not so: there are zillions of books > not sought by me, and it would be inappropriate to insert in the > Encyclopaedia Britannica entry for Book the information that I > was looking for one to prop open my door. Who says you have to write in the entry for Book everything that can be claimed about {lo'e cukta}? Does the entry for London tell about what happened in one of its buildings on May 27th just after lunch? > The problem is that *all* the properties of class generics are emergent. > If lo dodo was called Fritz, then loi dodo was called fritz, but > class-generic dodo wasn't called Fritz. loi dodo was called Fritz, but piro loi dodo wasn't. Unless you mean that if I eat an apple, I'm eating the whole mass of apples? What's the difference then between eating the whole mass and eating half the mass? I disagree that all properties of the members are properties of the mass, if that is what you are saying. > ----- > And Jorge