From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Fri Jun 09 22:04:22 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3318 ; Fri, 09 Jun 95 22:04:16 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Thu, 08 Jun 95 02:14:45 GMT Received: from [128.192.1.5] by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa11649; 8 Jun 95 3:13 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5173; Wed, 07 Jun 95 21:13:49 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7412; Wed, 7 Jun 1995 21:11:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 18:44:18 EDT Reply-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Subject: Re: non-existance predications X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506080313.aa11649@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R > >No, the existence postulated in the prenex is merely one of reference. > >If there is a predicate, and the predicate is not meaningless, then I > >don't see how it can be referentially empty. > > le'i du be la [empty set] That's the one-element set containing the empty set. > or le'i se cmima be noda That's the set of things that don't have members. Probably a set with infinitely many elements. > should be referentially empty. They are not. You could say something like {le'i blanu jenai blanu} The set of things that are and are not blue, but that is really using two predicates, and even then, because it is a tanru I could argue that there may be something that {blanu jenai blanu}. Jorge