From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri May 12 12:57:57 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 58300 invoked from network); 12 May 2006 19:57:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m28.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 12 May 2006 19:57:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 May 2006 19:57:06 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fedks-00013I-Ca for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 12 May 2006 12:56:54 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fedj2-000124-9t; Fri, 12 May 2006 12:55:02 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 12 May 2006 12:54:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1FediX-00011v-R0 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 12 May 2006 12:54:29 -0700 Received: from silene.metacarta.com ([65.77.47.18]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1FediU-00011l-5L for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 12 May 2006 12:54:29 -0700 Received: from localhost (silene.metacarta.com [65.77.47.18]) by silene.metacarta.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85EF9FA79 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 15:54:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from silene.metacarta.com ([65.77.47.18]) by localhost (silene.metacarta.com [65.77.47.18]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09544-08 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 15:54:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [65.77.47.138] (baxter.metacarta.com [65.77.47.138]) by silene.metacarta.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 354329FA75 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 15:54:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4464E7EE.8000104@ropine.com> Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 15:54:22 -0400 User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20051002) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4463F513.7060207@ropine.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at metacarta.com X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 11518 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: sethg@ropine.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Seth Gordon From: Seth Gordon Reply-To: sethg@ropine.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Usage of lo and le X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=bcik7aDlvPzDO1sy3xATUOh7G670r7SV1SCxjLQz3Q5LkFwOOg X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 25935 Maxim Katcharov wrote: > On 5/11/06, Seth Gordon wrote: > >> I have skimmed some of this discussion, so pardon me if I missed an >> important detail, but.... >> >> If I understand Maxim's argument, he wants {lo ro cribe} to refer to >> every bear that exists or may exist, unbounded by any context >> established by the conversation. By this definition, {lo ro cribe} > > > Indeed. This would allow one to define the context exactly, instead of > leaving it up to the listener to guess it. I don't think it's ever possible to "define the context exactly"; every act of communication has a context, and there's no way to eliminate the requirement for a shared understanding of what that context is. No matter how much explicit information you add to your message, there will always be something else lurking in the background. (Whatever you say explicitly is no longer the context of the message, it's part of the message itself.) Fortunately, in most communication between human beings, speakers are capable of knowing what information they can safely leave out and audiences are capable of either recognizing the context that they need to apply, or asking for clarification when they are confused. Even answering "2 + 2 = ?" requires a shared understanding that we are dealing with the set of integers rather than, say, the set of integers modulo 3. >> rather have the freedom to have a conversation in Lojban in the museum, >> say {lo ro cribe cu morsi}, and be understood as saying that all the >> bears *in this museum* are dead. >> > > My suggestion is that {lo cribe cu morsi} mean exactly that (blank > inner quantifier). One of the things I like about Lojban grammar is that (to borrow a maxim from a completely different language) "you don't pay for what you don't use"--if, for example, your audience will be able to infer the time of an event that you are describing, then you can leave out explicit tense markers in your statements. The decision to make {lo cribe cu morsi} carry no information about the number of bears involved seems to be in that spirit, and I see no reason to prefer a different default. To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.