Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 06:45:13 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199711151145.GAA06580@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com Sender: Lojban list From: bob@MEGALITH.RATTLESNAKE.COM Subject: Re: `at least one ' vrs `one or more' X-To: lojban@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: <199711142221.OAA12470@mercury.colossus.net> (lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net) Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 2075 X-From-Space-Date: Sat Nov 15 06:45:14 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Just so no one gets distracted: I am not talking about a situation in which necessity forces `one or more' to mean `all'. Clearly, if I say: .i naku zo'u mi viska lo mlatu It is false that I see one or more cats that means I do not see any cats since if you cannot see even one, you cannot see all cats. But the question is about a different kind of word: {nelci}, fond of/likes. The question is whether the following statement prevents me from also liking at least one cat? .i naku zo'u mi nelci lo mlatu It is false that I like some number, at least one, but perhaps more, of all real cats Does falseness regarding my liking of one or more cats apply globally to all cats? Or does the utterance make a more limited claim that it is false that I like some number of cats, that number being one or more? In my use of English, it makes the more limited claim. And it looks to me that it does in Lojban, too. Now, I am sure someone is going to question my introduction of the phrase `some number'. But does not the definitional expression (from Chapter 6.7) say: at least one of all of those which really are and does this not mean `some number, at least one, but perhaps more...', leaving, however, the number unspecified? Suppose we have a universe of five cats and I like three of them. In this context, it is true that 1. I like some number, at least one of all real cats, but perhaps more (in this case, three, but we are not specifying that). It is *also* true that 2. It is false that I like some number, at least one of all real cats, but perhaps more (in this case, two, but we are not specifying that). But this double truth cannot apply when you use a word such as `see' since the statement that: It is false that I can see some number, at least one, but perhaps more necessarily means I cannot see any. -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com 25 Rattlesnake Mountain Road bob@ai.mit.edu Stockbridge, MA 01262-0693 USA (413) 298-4725