Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 11:06:40 -0500
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@access.digex.net>
Message-Id: <199511081606.LAA03995@access4.digex.net>
To: cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG
Subject: Re:  TECH: lambda and "ka" revisited
Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Status: OR

What is not clear in this proposal, is whether you expect that xe'u is going
to be normally needed, or normally ellipsized, based on your new understanding 
of Quine. 

SEcond - how will this interact with other quantified expressions, 
especially in light of your proposal regarding "re nanmu " vs "re lo nanmu"

And do you need a BOI (explict or otherwise) to separate the xe'u from the
quantifier:
       ?le ka xe'ure nanmu cu gletu xe'ure ninmu
to get a little kinky perahps when contrasting with
       ?le ka xe'ure lo nanmu cu gletu xe'ure lo ninmu 


I am uncertain that I understand how all this ties in with the prenex versions.I
If xe'u is PA, then stupid interpretation will try to interpret it as a quantifier
for purposes of exporting to the prenex.  Will this work, and be consistent 
with your intent in akll cases?

And of course you may not want to put it explicitly in PA,because then someone
will ask what is xe'u + xe'u %^)

If the ZOhU version is a different and hence rejected solution, the following
does not apply.  If it is still under consideration (not clear in the proposal
since you introduce several forms and then never explicitly eliminate any,
but rather just proposae something final which may or may not overlap with
some of the arlier options), then is there really need for a spearate
cmavo from zo'u itself.  If there were need for explicit qquntification and
things would be ambiguous, you might be able to get away with preumeing
that a first of multiple zo'u s marked ze;u usage.

But even I see the probem with this now (I think).  What if you have two
quantified variables da and de, and you wish to lambda (on?) de but "da" has
wider scope.  What if you have da, de, and le nanmu, and wish to lambda on
le nanmu.  This prenex stuff is tricky enough as it is.

I'm kind of flailing away since I STILL don;t really understand lambda, though
I think I see its effects in the semantics more or less algorithmically.

Hopefull my rambling suggests what the really important questions are.

PS.  Why didn't pc want you to read Quine?

lojbab