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 m0r4nQx-00005bC; Tue, 8 Nov 94 12:05 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2647; Tue, 08 Nov 94 12:05:22 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2645; Tue, 8 Nov 1994 12:05:22 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9122; Tue, 8 Nov 1994 11:02:13 +0100 Date: Tue, 8 Nov 1994 09:55:04 GMT Reply-To: i.alexander.bra0125@oasis.icl.co.uk Sender: Lojban list From: i.alexander.bra0125@OASIS.ICL.CO.UK Subject: Re: lo X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 722 Lines: 15 la pycyn. cusku di'e > Someone suggested that I had special insight into descriptions and > quantifiers. I sure don't in English other than years of experience > and even then I am often fooled, especially by isolated examples. Well, I certainly got the impression that the terms "description" and "quantifier" had specific and contrasting meanings to you, which I for one was missing out on. And later on you introduce the term "cardinal" in contrast to "quantifier". Perhaps it's time for some more definitions of terminology. (Of course, which is which in English only matters in terms of giving intelligible examples. What really matters is what these terms mean, as concepts in symbolic logic.) mu'o mi'e .i,n.