From pycyn@aol.com Sat Apr 21 16:22:37 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 21 Apr 2001 23:22:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 75309 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2001 23:22:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Apr 2001 23:22:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r20.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.162) by mta1 with SMTP; 21 Apr 2001 23:22:35 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r20.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.9.) id r.d5.564508d (3980) for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:22:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:22:31 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:not only To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d5.564508d.28137037_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6783 --part1_d5.564508d.28137037_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 4/20/2001 9:41:38 PM Central Daylight Time,=20 lojbab@lojban.org writes: cowan: > Quiddities< explains a clear > >and general method for restating "only" in the language of predicate log= ic > >(which is of course what Lojban is about):> Identity...> > > > A vital use of identity lurks unobserved in much of our use > > > of 'only' and 'else' and 'nothing but'. When I say that the hiding > > > place is known to Ralph and only him, nobody else, I mean to > > > say two things: that Ralph knows the hiding place and that > > > whoever knows the hiding place is identical with Ralph. To > > > say that there is no God but Allah is to affirm, of whatever > > > Gods there be, that Each, or He, is identical with Allah. > >These two examples go directly into Lojban thus: > > ro da poi djuno fi le velmipri stuzi du la ralf. > > all x1s which know-about the secret-method place are-identical-= to=20 > > Ralph > > ro da poi cevni du la .alax. > > all x1s which are-gods are-identical-to Allah > >Here are more examples showing the flexibility of this "da poi... du"=20 > >construct: > > la djordj. du ro da poi darxi le tamni fo le nazbi > > George is-identical-to all those who hit the cousin on the nose= . > > Only George hit his cousin on his nose. > >(Note that English is over-specific by Lojban standards in saying "his=20 > >cousin". > >and "his nose". Likewise, English idiomatically says "He put his hands = in=20 > his > >pockets": to speakers of other languages, the question naturally arises > >"Whose pockets would he put his hands in?", and even more peculiar, "Who= se > >hands would he put in his pockets?".) > > ro da poi la djordj. darxi ke'a fo le nazbi du le tamne > > All those whom George hit on the nose are-identical-with the=20 > cousin. > > George hit only his cousin on his nose. > > ro da poi la djordj. darxi le tamne fo ke'a du le nazbi > > All that which George hit his cousin on are-identical-with the= =20 > nose > > George hit his cousin only on his nose. > > George hit his cousin on his nose only.> I am not generally a fan of Quine's (wrote a paper that showed a certain=20 theory as the way to go and ever after claimed the paper refuted the theory= ),=20 but this is nice and clear. Note, please, that he needs "Ralph and only=20 Ralph" to get in that Ralph knows -- "only Ralph" does not doe it by itself= . jimc, citing colin fine teeth on.=A0 Here is a short list of meanings, supplementing what Colinwro= te: >(1)=A0 =A0=A0 The only way is love=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 There is exactly= one X which is >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 a tadji (way), AND X is love >(2)=A0 =A0=A0 I ate only two cookies=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I ate two cookies,= AND two is less >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 than the expected number for this >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 situation >(3)=A0 =A0=A0 I only ate two cookies=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I ate two cookies,= AND that event >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 is less than what would normally >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 justify the criticism or punishment >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 that you are putting me through >(4)=A0 =A0=A0 She is only a servant=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 She is a servant= , AND this condition >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 implies a social status that is less >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 than what is normally expected for >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0=A0 the present situation >(5)=A0 =A0=A0 Smoke if you want, only not=A0 =A0=A0 Smoke if you want [dis= cursive of >=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 where I can smell it.=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 contrast] d= on't smoke where... >Thus, as Colin points out, the keyword "only" is very ambiguous and should >be avoided, and the English word is Protean (not Procrustean). >Syntactically in these examples, "only" is a 1-word abbreviation for a >deep structure consisting of a rather complicated supplementary >subordinate clause.> On 1, I would say there is at most one way "All ways are love" On 2, we did something a while back {nore} as I recall On 4, ga'i the converse, snob to the toady discussed earlier for honorifics On 5 ije ku'i 1 is where we still fight, 3 needs a solution alike in spirit, though=20 obviously not in form to 2.=20=20 The final conclusion here seems wrong:"only" is not a unitary phenomenon bu= t=20 the surface of a variety of deeps structure which happen to have fallen=20 together phonetically (even morphologically, perhaps). {mi'i} isn't UI and the others, with the possible exception of {kau} don't= =20 effect content in a logical way (deletion and insertion, for example, are=20 hardly logical operations, and {pe'a} modifies the meaning, not the structu= re=20 of the sentence. It is encouraging to think that SOMEONE knows (or has eve= n=20 a clue) of how {kau} works. Names?=20=20=20 --part1_d5.564508d.28137037_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 4/20/2001 9:41:38 PM Central Daylight Time,=20
lojbab@lojban.org writes:

cowan:
<Quine, whose book >= ;Quiddities< explains a clear
>and general method for restating "only" in the language of predicat= e logic
>(which is of course what Lojban is about):> Identity...>
> > A vital use of identity lurks unobserved in much of our use
> > of 'only' and 'else' and 'nothing but'.  When I say that= the hiding
> > place is known to Ralph and only him, nobody else, I mean to
> > say two things: that Ralph knows the hiding place and that
> > whoever knows the hiding place is identical with Ralph.  = ;To
> > say that there is no God but Allah is to affirm, of whatever
> > Gods there be, that Each, or He, is identical with Allah.
>These two examples go directly into Lojban thus:
>         ro da poi djuno fi= le velmipri stuzi du la ralf.
>         all x1s which know= -about the secret-method place are-identical-to=20
> Ralph
>         ro da poi cevni du= la .alax.
>         all x1s which are-= gods are-identical-to Allah
>Here are more examples showing the flexibility of this "da poi... d= u"=20
>construct:
>         la djordj. du ro d= a poi darxi le tamni fo le nazbi
>         George is-identica= l-to all those who hit the cousin on the nose.
>         Only George hit hi= s cousin on his nose.
>(Note that English is over-specific by Lojban standards in saying "= his=20
>cousin".
>and "his nose".  Likewise, English idiomatically says "He put = his hands in=20
his
>pockets": to speakers of other languages, the question naturally ar= ises
>"Whose pockets would he put his hands in?", and even more peculiar,= "Whose
>hands would he put in his pockets?".)
>         ro da poi la djord= j. darxi ke'a fo le nazbi du le tamne
>         All those whom Geo= rge hit on the nose are-identical-with the=20
cousin.
>         George hit only hi= s cousin on his nose.
>         ro da poi la djord= j. darxi le tamne fo ke'a du le nazbi
>         All that which Geo= rge hit his cousin on are-identical-with the=20
nose
>         George hit his cou= sin only on his nose.
>         George hit his cou= sin on his nose only.>

I am not generally a fan of Quine's (wrote a paper that showed a certai= n=20
theory as the way to go and ever after claimed the paper refuted the th= eory),=20
but this is nice and clear.  Note, please, that he needs "Ralph an= d only=20
Ralph" to get in that Ralph knows -- "only Ralph" does not doe it by it= self.

jimc, citing colin fine
<The word "only" was one of the first that I broke my
>teeth on.=A0 Here is a short list of meanings, supplementing what C= olinwrote:
>(1)=A0 =A0=A0 The only way is love=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 There is = exactly one X which is
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 a tadji (way), AND X is love
>(2)=A0 =A0=A0 I ate only two cookies=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I ate two c= ookies, AND two is less
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 than the expected number for this
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 situation
>(3)=A0 =A0=A0 I only ate two cookies=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I ate two c= ookies, AND that event
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 is less than what would normally
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 justify the criticism or punishment
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 that you are putting me through
>(4)=A0 =A0=A0 She is only a servant=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 She is a = servant, AND this condition
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 implies a social status that is less
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 than what is normally expected for
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 the present situation
>(5)=A0 =A0=A0 Smoke if you want, only not=A0 =A0=A0 Smoke if you wa= nt [discursive of
>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 where I can smell it.=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=A0 cont= rast] don't smoke where...
>Thus, as Colin points out, the keyword "only" is very ambiguous and= should
>be avoided, and the English word is Protean (not Procrustean).
>Syntactically in these examples, "only" is a 1-word abbreviation fo= r a
>deep structure consisting of a rather complicated supplementary
>subordinate clause.>
On 1, I would say there is at most one way "All ways are love"
On 2, we did something a while back {nore} as I recall
On 4, ga'i the converse, snob to the toady discussed earlier for honori= fics
On 5 ije ku'i
1 is where we still fight, 3 needs a solution alike in spirit, though=20
obviously not in form to 2.  
The final conclusion here seems wrong:"only" is not a unitary phenomeno= n but=20
the surface of a variety of deeps structure which happen to have fallen= =20
together phonetically (even morphologically, perhaps).

<kau, li'o, sa'a and possibly mi'i and pe'a all are UI discursives t= hat=20
change the logical content in significant ways.=A0 kau seems most clear= ly=20
similar to po'o in that it hides a long-winded logical expansion that f= ew=20
people know how to express.>
{mi'i} isn't UI and the others, with the possible exceptio= n of {kau} don't=20
effect content in a logical way (deletion and insertion, for example, a= re=20
hardly logical operations, and {pe'a} modifies the meaning, not the str= ucture=20
of the sentence.  It is encouraging to think that SOMEONE knows (o= r has even=20
a clue) of how {kau} works.   Names?   

--part1_d5.564508d.28137037_boundary--