From pycyn@aol.com Sat Mar 09 01:34:38 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 9 Mar 2002 09:34:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 63005 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2002 09:34:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m9.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Mar 2002 09:34:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m03.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.6) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Mar 2002 09:34:37 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.81.18bb9496 (18557) for ; Sat, 9 Mar 2002 04:34:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <81.18bb9496.29bb312a@aol.com> Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 04:34:34 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] Quantifiers, Existential Import, and all that stuff To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 13576 --part1_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/8/2002 10:02:24 AM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > > >E- no [lo ro] broda > >I+ su'o [lo ro] broda = su'o lo su'o broda > >O+ me'iro [lo ro] broda = me'iro lo su'o broda > > > >A+ ro lo su'o broda > >E+ no lo su'o broda > >I- naku no lo su'o broda > >O- naku ro lo su'o broda > I wish you'd make up your mind whether it is the things with internal {su'o} that are + or the things that are internal {ro}, the shifting back and forth makes this hard to follow without constantly checking the list again, which is more effort than crazinesses deserves. But, if {su'o broda cu brode} = {su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} then {naku su'o broda cu brode} must be also {naku su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} . But one of these is patently - and the other + or else the principle here is totally arbitrary (i.e., no principle at all). Or maybe there is one but it is so far from Lojban and logic, that I just can't see it. I do wish you would explain how it works (on loccan3, perhaps). --part1_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/8/2002 10:02:24 AM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


><A- ro [lo ro] broda
>E- no [lo ro] broda
>I+ su'o [lo ro] broda = su'o lo su'o broda
>O+ me'iro [lo ro] broda = me'iro lo su'o broda
>
>A+ ro lo su'o broda
>E+ no lo su'o broda
>I- naku no lo su'o broda
>O- naku ro lo su'o broda


I wish you'd make up your mind  whether it is the things with internal {su'o} that are + or the things that are internal {ro}, the shifting back and forth makes this hard to follow without constantly checking the list again, which is more effort than crazinesses deserves.  But, if  {su'o broda cu brode} = {su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} then {naku su'o broda cu brode} must be also {naku su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} .  But one of these is patently - and the other + or else the principle here is totally arbitrary (i.e., no principle at all).  Or maybe there is one but it is so far from Lojban and logic, that I just can't see it.  I do wish you would explain how it works (on loccan3, perhaps). --part1_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_boundary--