Message-Id: <m0sPXn6-0000YmC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Sat, 24 Jun 1995 11:51:26 -0400
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: mass again
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Content-Length: 1884
Lines: 41

>Subject:      Re: mass again
>> lo junta be loi remna cu ki'ogra li xa .a li vonono,ki'o,ki'o .a li tu'o
>> A weight of the mass of humanity is in kilograms "6" or "400,000,000" or
>>                                         "almost any number you choose".
>
>You are claiming that at least one of those is true, which is a weaker
>claim than what you mean, I think.

OK, so I was writing in the middle of the night and not thinking
straight.

>Using {e}'s instead of {a}'s would not help, because in that case you'd
>be saying that there is at least one weight that is each and every one
>of those numbers, but you don't want that.
>
>I think that what you meant to say is:
>
>li xa e li vononoki'oki'o e li tu'o cu se ki'ogra lo junta be loi remna

Not what I meant to say.  I obviously wanted the mutual XOR, which for 3
items is impractical to do with logical connectives.  The lu'a series
was put in specifically to resolve the multiple connectives situation,
when pc last got out his calculator to determine the possible number of
weird truth situations to be dealt with (for 3 connectives or for 4
connectives) and demonstrated that the Lojban connective system could
not express all the possible truth table cases.

So my more correct statement should have been:
lo junta be loi remna cu ki'ogra pa lu'a li xa ce li vonono,ki'o,ki'o ce li tu'o
>> A weight of the mass of humanity is in kilograms 1 of {"6", "400,000,000",
>>                                         "almost any number you choose"}.

>and I totally agree with the statement, though I read it slightly
>differently than you. "A weight of some mass of humanity", rather than
>"of the mass of humanity".

I am alas prone to talking in Lojlish (that rather stilted style I use
in JL) when translating Lojban in parallel, a style in which words
sometimes are used, well, stiltedly.  Sorry for the confusion.

lojbab