Message-Id: <199601202210.RAA08698@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Thu, 18 Jan 1996 19:52:31 +0000
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: PLI: se pixra (PU: TECH: opacity continued)
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
Content-Length: 3863

Goran:
> > > I am happy with {ti pixra le/lo/lo/lo'e/le'e gerku},
> > That's right, but (ignoring nonveridicality) all claim or at least
> > imply that you could go out into the world (possibly equipped with
> > time machine) and find the dog that is depicted.
> That's true of le/lo, but not of lo'e/le'e, IMHO... I take {ti pixra
> lo'e gerku} to mean "This is a picture of some generic dog." For {lo
> gerku}, the streak of white fur above the right eye is significant. It
> is a specific dog. Some dog, I might not know which one, but I am sure
> it exists somewhere. Now, with {lo'e gerku} the only thing that matters
> to me is it's basic dogness.

The discussions about the meaning of {loe} have been long, and my
understanding has changed a lot. I know how I understand {loe},
but I don't think there is a Right answer, or even an Authorized
one.

> {lo pixra lo'e gerku} is a picture of something noi ckaji dogness.

{lo gerku} also ckaji dogness.

> But it is just a concept, and not your actual I-can-pet-it-and-feed-it-
> and-take-it-home type of a dog. xunai?

No, I think not. {pixra loe gerku} on my view means that some gerku
was/were depicted, but that not only am I not saying which gerku were
depicted, and how many, I am also not committing myself as to whether
saying so makes any sense or is even in principle possible. On
pc's view, {pixra loe gerku} means that the average dog is depicted
(whether by the same or a different picture depends, I presume, on
scope, but this I think has not been thought through by anyone, and
it's a reason not to use {loe} for this "averaging" job, but rather
to use something in PA). If the average dog is depicted (or, more
plausibly, the average monarch) then it should be possible to go out
and find depicted dog (it won't always work - if the average family
has 2.4 children then you can't actually go out and find family with
2.4 kids).

> > > Of course, you can't use lo'e on photos, just paintings.
> > I don't see that.
> 'Cause a photo always shows an actual I-can-pet-it-and-feed-it-and-take-
> it-home type of a dog.

I think that {loe gerku} is I-can-pet-it-and-feed-it-and-take-it-home.
On pc's version, you may not actually be able to pet it, but nonetheless
what ever you can predicate of {lo broda} can also be predictaed of
{loe broda}.

> As far as I understand your discussions (which
> is not very much, I must admit), at least some of you take {mi zgana
> lo'e cipni} to mean "I watch birds" or "I am a bird-watcher", but not "I
> am watching a bird", or even "I noticed a typical bird".

You are reporting Jorge's view. I'm not sure how much of what he was
saying is what he believes is really crucial, and how much is an
accident of the way he was trying to explain it, but at any rate, I've
argued that the "nonspecificity" of "birds" in "I watch birds" is due
to the habitual aspect - "I have a habit such that for each manifestation
of that habit there is a bird ({lo cipni}) that I watch". No call for
{loe}.

I tentatively think that this stuff about habituality was an accident
of how Jorge explained {loe}. I think he'd accept {mi pu zgana
loe cipni} as "I birdwatched yesterday", meaning that {da poi mi kea
pu zgana cu cipni}.

> The latter is {mi zgana lo fadni cipni}, right?

Right.

> You just don't use {lo'e} for the
> actual instances, only for the concept. "I am a noticer of Miss Bird,
> whenever She chooses to show Herself to me." Same logic. You don't use
> lo'e if you refer to some specific instance of Mr. Dog.

But if there is only one dog, or you weren't sure whether there is only
one dog, then use {loe}. {loe} is what you use when you can't be
bothered with quantification.

This hasn't been the most perspicuous of messages, I realize. Probably
"{loe} is what you use when you can't be bothered with quantification"
says best what I mean.

coo, mie And