Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 03:28:48 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199711140828.DAA20871@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Pycyn@AOL.COM Sender: Lojban list From: "John E. Clifford" Subject: Re: A Problem with Abstractions X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1044 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Nov 14 03:29:05 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU I'm finally getting around to reading some of these threads (and finding them thoroughly tangled, I must say, though this one is not bad aside from my never getting some messages on it). Yes, I did read Horn and send a precis (which I can no longer find) on to Lojbab and John. But that precis (as far as I can recall) did not affect that clause-length _na_, arguments about which go back at least to the early days of the old Loglan journal, with a "final" decision having been made several times, depending on which desiderata were at the fore at the moment. In spite of its apparent complexity, the present form (which was the original one) works the best in the long run. As for the English version of this usage, Day One of any Logic section on the Aristotelian syllogism involves pounding in the rule that "All S is not P" is ambiguous between E and O, to be sorted out in context and usually deciding for O (this sermonette comes right after the one about "only" -- but please don't revive *that* thread -- and "none but"). >|83 pc