Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id NAA16497 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 13:48:07 -0500 Message-Id: <199601051848.NAA16497@locke.ccil.org> Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.0a) with SMTP id BFD509E0 ; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 13:21:40 -0500 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 18:21:48 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: misc responses to and X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1083 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Jan 5 13:48:09 1996 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:37:07 -0500 From: Logical Language Group jc> >> "Physical" is a sticky notion. There is no problem with "nu" objects jc> >> that aren't actualized, like "le nu le djordj. .ualas. cu merko gugde jc> >> ralju" even though George Wallace wasn't ever U.S. President. ar> >There is every problem with such nu objects. {nu la djordj ualas cu ar> >merko gugde ralju} is false. lb> Why is falsehood a problem? Lojban is NOT the mythical language where lb> it is impossible to utter falsehoods. And it is certainly meaningful lb> to be able to refer to non-occuring events. To phrase your text one way: lb> le nu la djordj ualas cu merko gugde ralju cu na fasnu {lo nu la djordj ualas cu merko gugde ralju cu na fasnu} means {da zou da nu la djordj ualas cu merko gugde ralju kei gie da na fasnu}, which is false, since {no da fasnu gie na fasnu}. The problem is that statements like {xamgu gie nu la djordj ualas cu merko gugde ralju} will necessarily be false, even if it would have been good if GW were president. --- And