From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Mar 19 11:18:23 2002
Return-Path: <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: unknown); 19 Mar 2002 19:18:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 53011 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 18:31:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Mar 2002 18:31:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.113)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
	 Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:31:40 -0800
Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40 GMT
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Bcc: 
Subject: Re: [lojban] Logic course
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F113lkDbZz4eD1rnyxR0001df24@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40.0736 (UTC) FILETIME=[4FEFDC00:01C1CF74]
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2]
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566
X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 13827


la greg cusku di'e

>1){roda de zo'u li da su'i de du li no}

The not-quite-equivalence of sumti and operands can be quite
annoying. {li da} is not grammatical. You could write it as:

   roda de zo'u li no sumji da de

or, if you insist with MEX:

   roda de zo'u li mo'e da su'i mo'e de du li no

but {mo'e} has problems too. Some people say it is for
dimensioned numbers, which would conflict with this use.
Besides, the non-MEX form is much shorter.

>(can only da de and di (w/ subscripts) be used as bound variables ?)

In my opinion, the lerfu pronouns, the ko'a/fo'a series, the
vo'a series, ri, ra, ru, all work just as much as bound
variables as da, de, di. The only differenvce is in how the
binding takes effect.

>what does
>1'){roxy. zy. zo'u li xy su'i zy. du li no} mean ?

{ro xy zy} is a single number. You need {roboi xyboi zyboi}
in the prenex. Other than that, I think it works. (Though
I prefer the {sumji} version.)

>how long do bound variables last, if propositions are logically connected ?

You can use tu'e-tu'u if there is any doubt.

>2){roda rode rodi zo'u du li da su'i de li da su'i di li no .inaja du li de
>li di}

Again, {li da} does not work. You can say:

roda rode rodi zo'u ganai li no sumji da de e di gi de di du

>3){da zo'u li xy. du li da pi'i da}

What is xy here? A constant?

   da zo'u xy pilji da da

>4){da zo'u li xy. du li da su'i da}

   da zo'u xy sumji da da

>5){roda zo'u de zo'u li da du li de te'a re .inaja di zo'u li da du li di
>pi'i vo}

roda zo'u ganai de zo'u da tenfa de li re gi di zo'u da pilji di li vo


mu'o mi'e xorxes




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com