From sentto-44114-2287-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Mon Mar 20 19:58:30 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 23274 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2000 19:58:28 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 20 Mar 2000 19:58:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 9776 invoked by uid 40001); 20 Mar 2000 19:59:43 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 9773 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2000 19:59:42 -0000 Received: from hi.egroups.com (208.48.218.11) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 20 Mar 2000 19:59:42 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-2287-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.38] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 20 Mar 2000 19:59:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 13398 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2000 19:59:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 20 Mar 2000 19:59:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.reutershealth.com) (204.243.9.36) by mta1.onelist.com with SMTP; 20 Mar 2000 19:59:22 -0000 Received: from reutershealth.com (IDENT:cowan@skunk.reutershealth.com [204.243.9.153]) by mail.reutershealth.com (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA03484 for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2000 14:59:16 -0500 (EST) Sender: cowan@mail.reutershealth.com Message-ID: <38D68346.FFE7276B@reutershealth.com> Organization: Reuters Health Information X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en To: "lojban@onelist.com" References: <20000311174627.42115.qmail@hotmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@onelist.com; contact lojban-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 15:00:06 -0500 X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan Subject: Re: [lojban] Mass/Set Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: John Cowan Jorge Llambias wrote: > >If I'm right in the above, then the claim that one may rigorously > >transform either of 6.1 and 6.2 into the other entails that different > >sets of zarci can be meant in 6.2 too. If that is the case, then I'd > >have thought that this would extend to {le prenu cu klama le zarci} and > >indeed also to {le nanmu cu bevri le bloti}. > > I agree with your reasoning. I think that the book exaggerates > a little when it says that one can be _rigorously_ transformed > into the other. It can be only when it is understood in 6.1 that > {le zarci} refers both times to the same object, which I think > is what was being (unexplicitly) assumed. Yes. 6.1 can be transformed into something that looks just like 6.2 without change of meaning, even though some other instance of 6.2 may mean something different. Here's an analogy: x.1) John is a bachelor. x.2) John is an unmarried man. Because "bachelor" means "unmarried man", we can rigorously transform Example x.1 into Example x.2 or vice versa. Nevertheless, x.1 and x.2 might have different truth values if a different John is referred to in each. -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 0.0% Intro APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW! http://click.egroups.com/1/975/2/_/17627/_/953582376/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com