From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:53:27 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 12670 invoked from network); 25 Sep 1997 08:27:40 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 25 Sep 1997 08:27:40 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.137ABCAA@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 10:27:23 +0100 Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 09:20:49 BST Reply-To: Don Wiggins Sender: Lojban list From: Don Wiggins Subject: Re: RV: na'e entails na? X-To: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1376 Lines: 37 Message-ID: > For example, everyone is either citizen of France or citizen of > some other country. [NB INCLUSIVE OR] I want to describe > the latter group as "na`e fraso zei selgugde" [I'm taking x1 of > selgugde to be a citizen]. But since for example someone can be a > citizen of both France and Britain, "na`e fraso zei selgugde" > would not work if it entails "na fraso zei selgugde". "na fraso > ..." gives me everyone who isn't French, whereas I want > everyone who is a citizen of a country other than France. > For that I would like to use "na`e fraso", but will not be > able to if everyone bar me gets their way! This is relatively straight-forward set theory. Consider the universal set E = { a, b, c, d, e } let's have fraso (E) = { a, b, c } and glico (E) = { c, d, e } i.e. fraso ^ glico (E) = { c } the set that you wish to express is { c, d, e }, those who are citizens of elsewhere but possibly also citizens of France. according to my definitions for na'e and po'o (thanks to Rod Engdahl for pointing 'not only') na'e (fraso (E)) = { d, e } po'o (fraso (E)) = { a, b } and !(po'o (fraso (E)) = { c, d, e } > I want > everyone who is a citizen of a country other than France. I conclude that what you should say is "everyone who is a citizen of a country that is not only France" or "na po'o fraso selgu'e". ni'oco'omi'e dn.