Date:  Sun, 12 Oct 1997 06:23:15 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199710121123.GAA06870@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: HACKER G N <c9709244@ALINGA.NEWCASTLE.EDU.AU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: HACKER G N <c9709244@ALINGA.NEWCASTLE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: quantifiable pro-bridi (fwd)
X-To:         Lojban List <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 781
Lines: 26

On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, And Rosta wrote:

> John:
> > > This isn't explicitly
> > > stated in the book because I was leery of saying too much about
> > > second-order quantification when my understanding of it is
> > > quite shaky.
>
> So's mine.
>
> Geoff:
> > I would
> > perhaps have been a bit more comfortable with "su'o nu bu'a", "su'o su'u
> > bu'a" or some other such abstraction to express a
> > predicate relation in a prenex,
>
> I was wondering if it might be possible to stick to first
> order and use {ka}, which I don't understand very well.
>
> If we understand quantifying over predicates to be quantification
> over intensions, how in Lojban do we get something denoting
> an intension? Is it {ka}?

What do you mean by "intension"?

Geoff