Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 18 Aug 2001 06:26:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 86316 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 06:26:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Aug 2001 06:26:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta05-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.45) by mta2 with SMTP; 18 Aug 2001 06:26:06 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.255.41.57]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010818062605.ELLM20588.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 07:26:05 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] polyadic connectives Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 07:22:22 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 9755 Content-Length: 1682 Lines: 59 Jorge: > la and cusku di'e > > >I've got two questions: > > > >1. What connectives make sense when extended to sets of varying size? > >(What's the term for what I mean? Commutative functions? Ones where > >all arguments are treated alike.) > > How about "quantifiers"? I think I was thinking of "commutative" and "associative". > > * and = all of > > * or = at least one of > > * extended xor = exactly one of > > * extended iff = all of or none of > > * ... and what else? (apart from negations of these four) > > exactly two of > exactly three of > at least two of > at most one of > between 3 and 7 of > even: many of, most of, a few of > > All of these treat all members of the set indiscriminately, i.e. > they don't depend on the order in which the connectands are > presented. And of course, these are the ones that are relatively > easy to do in Lojban, using {PA lu'a ...ce...ce...ce...}. I didn't quite ask the question I meant to ask. By "make sense" I meant "are useful", "are ones we might wish to use more than once in a blue moon". --And. > >2. Does Lojban have any way of doing "all or none" without resorting to > >an explicit disjunction? For example, is there a way of saying "more > >than none and less than all", without the conjunction? > > Maybe {ma'ume'iro} "positive less than all". > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > >