From sentto-44114-23640-1105412670-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Mon Jan 10 19:08:12 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:08:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from n12a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com ([66.94.237.20]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CoCNs-0005Tb-1q for lojban-in@lojban.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:07:52 -0800 Received: from [66.218.66.59] by n12.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Jan 2005 03:04:30 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.29] by mailer8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Jan 2005 03:04:30 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email X-Sender: a.rosta@v21.me.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 74992 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2005 03:04:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2005 03:04:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO heineken.flexi-surf.co.uk) (62.41.128.20) by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Jan 2005 03:04:29 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer ([217.140.36.3]) by heineken.flexi-surf.co.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id j0B13IS12849 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 01:03:18 GMT Message-ID: <007101c4f78a$40cde780$c2e1fea9@oemcomputer> To: References: <20050109222522.45538.qmail@web41901.mail.yahoo.com> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 62.41.128.20 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: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 03:04:20 -0000 Subject: [lojban] Re: xorlo & mi nitcu lo mikce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-archive-position: 9225 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@v21.me.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list [Ought I to be sending this to wikidiscuss-list@lojban.org? I haven't yet got my head around where to post emails with technical content.] xorxes: > --- And Rosta wrote: > > IIUC, "mi nitcu lo mikce" will have a meaning that > > generalizes over the two more particular readings "I need > > a doctor" can have (viz "There's a doctor who I need" > > vs. "I need a doctor, any doctor, (tho there may be > > no such doctor)". > > "There is at least one doctor such that I need that doctor" > would be {mi nitcu su'o lo mikce} or equivalently > {su'o da poi mikce zo'u mi nitcu da}. > > {mi nitcu lo mikce} is not a "there is" claim any more than > {la djan cu dansu} is a "there is" claim. It's not a claim > about what there is but rather a claim that the referent > of {mi} is in a certain relationship with the referent of > {lo mikce}. Okay; I see this. > >(And likewise for "mi nitcu re mikce".) > > "mi nitcu re mikce" says that among the things that are doctors > there are exactly two, no more and no less, that I need. This > may be true for example if I need Dr Jones and Dr Smith and no > other doctor, or if I need a cardiologist and an oncologist and > no other doctor. It depends on what counts as a doctor in the > context. Okay. This is what I had understood. > > Is there a straightforward way of expressing each of > > the two readings distinctly? > > In the case of {re mikce}, we could say {mi nitcu re klesi be > lo mikce} vs {mi nitcu re prenu poi mikce}, for example, to > distinguish two kinds of doctor from two persons who are doctors. Okay. > If what you need is a doctor pair for some reason (irrespective > of specialities), then {mi nitcu lo re mikce} would be the way > to say it. Okay again. But let me reask my question, because it hasn't been answered yet. "PA broda" can apply to PA subkinds of Brodakind or to PA things that are classified as having the property of being broda. -- Xorlo generalizes over that dichotomy, which is fair enough, but since it is a distinction that underlies the two nonspecific readings of "I need a doctor", it would be nice to have a way of making the distinction if one wanted to. That is, given "mi nitcu re mikce", it would be nice to have a way of signalling whether the truth-conditions of the sentence are to involve checking through the subkinds of Mr Doctor (& seeing whether I need exactly two of them) or, on the other hand, checking through the things in the material world that are classified as having the property of doctorhood (& seeing whether I need exactly two of them). I'm not saying that this is something the BPFK gadri proposals should have covered; but I find it hard to imagine how the distinction could be marked other than by gadri and, obviously, the matter occurs to me because in ancestral versions of xorlo the distinction was made. --And. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater? Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good! http://us.click.yahoo.com/TzSHvD/SOnJAA/79vVAA/GSaulB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: lojban-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/