Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 12814 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2000 00:47:14 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 27 Sep 2000 00:47:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 19303 invoked by uid 40001); 27 Sep 2000 00:48:04 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 19300 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2000 00:48:04 -0000 Received: from mo.egroups.com (208.50.144.78) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 27 Sep 2000 00:48:04 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-4448-970015682-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.36] by mo.egroups.com with NNFMP; 27 Sep 2000 00:48:03 -0000 X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_0_3); 27 Sep 2000 00:48:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 2722 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2000 00:48:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 27 Sep 2000 00:48:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r12.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 27 Sep 2000 00:48:01 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r12.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.24.) id a.63.b99543d (2618) for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:47:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <63.b99543d.27029db9@aol.com> To: lojban@egroups.com X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 41 From: pycyn@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@egroups.com; contact lojban-owner@egroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@egroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 20:47:53 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Get Much Ca$h ! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1151 Lines: 28 In a message dated 00-09-26 19:30:09 EDT, you write: << >roda nirna roda >roda se nirna roda >roda selnirna roda >roda roda selnirna It is not clear what is the effect of quantifying the same variable twice in the same sentence. Either the second {da} has to be taken as a new variable, saying that each thing is a nerve/neuron of each thing, or the second quantifier has to be ignored, saying that each thing is a nerve/neuron of itself. >> In standard logic, it would be the second. However, in standard logic, both of these would be prenex and so both of the {da}s would be in the scope of both quantifiers and thus of the second, to which the pair qwould then reduce. So the result would be the second version. Now, in Lojban. ... -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~> Get a NextCard Visa with rates as low as 2.99% Intro APR! 1. Fill in the brief application 2. Get approval decisions in 30 seconds! http://click.egroups.com/1/9334/4/_/17627/_/970015682/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com