From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri May 27 09:14:16 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 27 May 2005 09:14:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DbhTL-0006Ez-Pl
	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 09:14:07 -0700
Received: from web81307.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.82])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DbhTG-0006Ec-64
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 27 May 2005 09:14:07 -0700
Message-ID: <20050527161508.94098.qmail@web81307.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [68.88.37.184] by web81307.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 27 May 2005 09:15:08 PDT
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 09:15:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Again {lo}.
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: 6667
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
X-archive-position: 10062
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

Surely, if no dog is a friend of any man, then
{le gerku cu xagai pendo lo remna} is false, so
it does indeed entail Robin Turk's claimed
reading.
Necessarily. (This is built on the assumption
that under the verbiage to the contrary, xorlo
does have some single actual meaning, however
vague or generic.)

--- Robin Lee Powell
<rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 12:37:46PM -0400, robin
> wrote:
> > Opi Lauma wrote:
> > >>For example to say that the dog is man's
> best friend
> > >
> > >you 
> > >
> > >>would use {lo gerku}: {lo gerku cu xagrai
> pendo lo remna}
> > >
> > >
> > >OK, in this example {lo gerku} means neither
> "all dogs" nor "some
> > >dogs", it rather means "most of dogs" isn't?
> Really, we can say
> > >that "the dog is man's best friend" only if
> MOST OF DOGS are
> > >man's best friends. Or the same {lo gerku}
> can be replaced here
> > >by "a typical dog" without changes in
> meaning, I think. So, are
> > >"most of ..." and "a typical ..." correct
> substitution for {lo}?
> > >If "Yes", can this interpretation be used
> always? By the way in
> > >English sentence "The" has been used and in
> lojban {lo}. Why?
> > 
> > {lo gerku cu pendo lo remna} means that there
> is at least one dog,
> > such that it is a friend to at least one
> human, 
> 
> Not under the BPFK it doesn't.
> 
> Or at least, not *necessarily*.
> 
>
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=How%20to%20use%20xorlo
> 
> In particular, {lo} can mean {lo'e}, being
> totally generic.
> 
> (Of course, technically the BPFK isn't done
> yet, and hence the
> BPFK's lo could change; I wouldn't hold your
> breath, though)
> 
> -Robin
> 
> -- 
> http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ ***
> http://www.lojban.org/
> Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their
> Grate!"
> Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute -
> http://singinst.org/
> 
> 
> 
>