From sentto-44114-15864-1032441890-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Thu Sep 19 06:34:03 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 19 Sep 2002 06:34:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n28.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.84]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17s1RP-0003G8-00 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 06:33:59 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-15864-1032441890-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.198] by n28.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Sep 2002 13:24:51 -0000 X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 19 Sep 2002 13:24:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 9373 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2002 13:24:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Sep 2002 13:24:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Sep 2002 13:24:50 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Thu, 19 Sep 2002 13:52:28 +0100 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 14:24:48 +0100 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 To: nessus , lojban From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 14:24:28 +0100 Subject: Re: [lojban] tu'o usage Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 1352 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Lionel Vidal: #la pc cusku di'e: #> {tu'o}, the "null operand" (nowhere further explained) is used here as a #> vacuous PA. The grammar requires a descriptor or a number here, but the fact #> is that there is always exactly one thing satisfying this description, so why #> get involved with all the problems (quantifiers especially) that using a #> regular form involves? # #la xorxes cusku di'e #>{tu'o} is the "quantifier" you use when you don't want a #>quantifier. # #What is then the semantic of {tu'o broda}? If it is used when there is #exactly one thing satisfying the description, why not be explicit #with {lo pa broda}? Reasons: 1. A single-member category is logically simpler than a many-member category. It is helpful to users to mark this absence of complexity (e.g. it says "Don't worry about quantifier scope"), but it is counterintuitive to have to add extra coomplexity, in the form of an extra word {pa} , in order to signal an absence of complexity! 2. {lo pa broda} claims that there is only one broda. {tu'o broda} does not make such a claim; it is just that there is no other sensible interpretation for it, so it implies that there is only one broda. {lo'e broda} does not claim that there is exactly one broda, but is an instruction to conceptualize broda as a single-member category. --And. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Sell a Home for Top $ http://us.click.yahoo.com/RrPZMC/jTmEAA/MVfIAA/GSaulB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/