From cowan Sat Mar 6 22:57:47 2010 Subject: TECH: proposed acceptance of TLI "me" interpretation To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List) From: cowan Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 16:30:01 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1959 Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Tue Nov 7 16:30:01 1995 X-From-Space-Address: cowan Message-ID: After thinking about it for quite a while, I have come to believe that the TLI interpretation of "me" is the correct one, and should superseded the current rather vague "assocatied with " that we have always had. When last we visited this question, it seemed to me that the TLI interpretation was the same as "du be ", but I have now been convinced that is is not. Instead, it is an operator that constructs a selbri (one-place) that is true of all the things described by the sumti and no others. Thus, if I am "la djan." or just "mi", then "me la djan." and "me mi" are selbri that truthfully apply precisely to me and nothing else. Thus, the sentences 1) la djan. me mi 2) mi me la djan. 3) la djan. me la djan. count as true, and 4) la bob. me la djan. counts as false. So far, so much like "du". But consider the case where the sumti is plural in reference rather than singular. If "le ci nolraitru" are the ones who (ka'u) arrive on January 6, then 5) la melkior. me le ci nolraitru 6) la baltazar. me le ci nolraitru 7) la kaspar. me le ci nolraitru count as true, and 8) la djan me le ci nolraitru 9) la bob. me le ci nolraitru count as false. In this sense, "me" is an extension of the logician's operator to turn a singular term into a general term; it now also turns a plural term into a general one, and in a natural extension. Note that Examples 5-7 cannot be seen as variants of "du": it is not the case, say, that Melchior is identical to the three kings. The only way to do this now, I believe, is to create a gratuitous set and then tear it apart: 10) la melkior. se cmima lu'i le ci nolraitru This change will not really make much text incorrect: most uses of "me" now are either in observatives that are titles, or in the seltanru of tanru, where the meaning can be vague without problem: 11) ta me la kraislr. karce That's a Chysler car. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.