From 3O9LFSwoJBh8EEGG5H6D5NBH5DG.7JHGJE65IBJJBG9BMJPKN.7JH@groups.bounces.google.com Wed Apr 14 07:34:11 2010 Received: from mail-yw0-f143.google.com ([209.85.211.143]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3O9LFSwoJBh8EEGG5H6D5NBH5DG.7JHGJE65IBJJBG9BMJPKN.7JH@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1O23fF-0004Bd-TC; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:34:10 -0700 Received: by ywh7 with SMTP id 7sf101438ywh.26 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:33:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:date:received:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tDLRTlnoBDQXOBgKZs4rFzL3cyoTbyIA7WAVMy1yeTg=; b=FcOrCF7IDmvlAySAvDmY6CEuinvrT1oKvni02wRtfxtVhCDk1UOVpDJqL8iTzBnnPy 85UCRd1VqVL9Q3NCxu8v2weUi/8WJUeEUGKWH6O40WNq2nOZgWHfwnBin0VCrJL88W1i LJmxmtUhPDNo1CIYd8TcRseMRNYxxdOFmQjm0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=2x+PZWLBClX5BBg106DxJmVEfHXneBt0PFlEFVgANxx7GzBylFw0UzqlRiux1F7/xa CJmV9ZnCniMttHXfz53e4GOj9jg2rSu6NlY2q875vHHLNbDrYkneQnFqWerjO/RzIo7u zCcvRZqcI5NqBr4ysXx7Jk1t8ywxVsRAb0zMA= Received: by 10.91.93.4 with SMTP id v4mr1232112agl.6.1271255611465; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:33:31 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.145.167 with SMTP id p39ls278887wej.0.p; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:33:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.87.66 with SMTP id x44mr273116wee.7.1271255520040; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:32:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.87.66 with SMTP id x44mr273115wee.7.1271255520002; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:32:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f171.google.com (mail-qy0-f171.google.com [209.85.221.171]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id p33si478369wba.7.2010.04.14.07.31.58; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.171 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.221.171; Received: by mail-qy0-f171.google.com with SMTP id 1so217879qyk.15 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:31:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.79.75 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:31:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BC52345.7010303@gmail.com> References: <4BBE188B.8070807@lojban.org> <4BC1D15A.5030409@lojban.org> <4BC36464.8010707@gmail.com> <4BC3B98F.5070805@gmail.com> <4BC4B763.6070903@gmail.com> <4BC52345.7010303@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:31:56 -0300 Received: by 10.229.88.193 with SMTP id b1mr4698100qcm.27.1271255517129; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] {le} in xorlo From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.171 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: X-Thread-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/t/33d26e8385fed297 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/e57786bfd2aca04d Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:07 PM, And Rosta wrote: > > I'm fine with "so'i li mu" being "many fives", coerced by the > quantification. > In English, one does get things like "my mother that bore me", "London th= at > I have luved in for so many years", which don't coerce a "many > mothers/Londons" interpretation. So restrictiveness needn't coerce plural > interp. I Googled "my mother that bore me", and the first (of only six) hits was: "My mother and I=96and by "my mother" I mean always one of my two mothers, for my mother that bore me was dead=96" and that seems like the most natural use for "my mother that bore me" to me, but some of the other hits are not so clear that the restriction is doing actual restrictive work. The London example sounds odd to my non-native sense without a "the" in front, and I would want to change "that" to "where" (unless it's a vocative?), but I don't really want to dispute that there may be restrictive clauses that don't do any actual restriction. > Also, I can't think how the poi/noi distinction can apply when there is n= o > predicate (selbri) present either explicitly, or implicity as when a > quantifier is applied to a sumti. With quantification the distinction is very stark: ro da poi xunre cu kukte Everything that is red is delicious. ro da noi xunre cu kukte Everything, which is red, is delicious. > Not that any of this matters much to the meaning of formal definitions of > {le}, of course, since we agree that your no'oi, nonveridical noi, could = be > used. Right, but it's an interesting side issue nonetheless. >> http://www.amazon.com/Plural-Predication-Thomas-McKay/dp/0199278148 >> (or was rather, when the draft version was available online). >> Not that the whole book was relevant to Lojban, but one or two >> chapters were very illuminating. > > Can one get emailed a copy of the draft...? I don't have one, I've changed computers too many times since. I don't know if anyone else might have it. >> "PA lo gunma" is ordinary quantification over groups, while "PA loi" >> is quantification over the members of the group. > > Yes, I see. I can't decide if the problem goes away if "loi broda" is not > "lo gunma" but rather "zo'e noi ke'a gunma", I'd say that "lo gunma" is just the same as "zo'e noi ke'a gunma". > since "PA zo'e noi ke'a gunma" > quantifies over members of zo'e. which must be things that satisfy the x1 of gunma. > I guess it comes down to whether "zo'e noi > ke'a broda" necessarily means zo'e is a single broda (as required for "zo= 'e > noi ke'a gunma" to work as a solution) No, that's not required. Many things can work as a solution working together without that making them one thing. (That's essentially McKay's argument.) But the kind of thing that satisfy the x1 of gunma is the kind of thing that has members, as opposed to the kind of thing that satisfy the x2 of gunma, which are typically many things working together. >or whether it can mean zo'e is a > bunch of broda (as required, I'm fairly sure, by xorlo). zo'e can be many broda without necessarily being one anything (whether bunch or whatever). > Actually, those are > both meanings one needs to be able to express. Maybe "zo'e noi pa gunma n= e > ke'a"? (The thinking in this para is low quality, so feel free to ignore > it...) The two meanings are easily expressible without any recourse to "loi": "lo broda" vs. "lo gunma be lo broda". > The actual English example "came by bus" seems to me to demand a generic > reading (because that seems to be the effect of using _bus_ without an > article), but if we can use, say, "I will drink wine" as an example, then > the nongeneric reading can be specific or nonspecific, "Ex, x is wine: I > will drink x" being the nonspecific. Right, but I think we don't need to commit to one of the two readings, or perspectives, to get the meaning. In the case of the bus we may be forced to by English: They came by bus, so they arrived earlier than those of us that came by bike, even though (?it / their bus) had to stop for gas. It seems to me that "it" can't be used there, because grammatically "bus" doesn't have a nongeneric perspective available, but: They drank wine, and I only had water, so I will drive. Not that I wouldn't have wanted to drink (it / the wine) too, but they had finished it before I arrived. In this case, it seems to me, "it" seems more acceptable (what are the native intuitions?). But in Lojban both perspectives remain always available, giving something that would seem weird in English like: They came by bus, so they arrived earlier than those of us that came by bike, even though bus had to stop for gas. So "bus" can be generic and still stop for gas in a particular occasion. >> What I'm trying to say (I think) is that the level of abstraction, >> which is to some extent arbitrary, can set the stage in such a way >> that the issue of specificity will be affected. But I know I'm not >> saying anything very convincing about it at this point. > > OK, I understand your point, I think. Translated into my terms, it is tha= t > specific readings are nongeneric; so if something is viewed generically, > then perforce it's not specific. Mmm... I think I'm saying the opposite, that generic readings are always specific, but because of the arbitrary perspective of genericity, they can often be taken as nongeneric nonspecific as well. But I have to keep insisting that I'm not certain if that's exactly what I'm saying. :) > "zo'e noi ke'a broda" effectively gives you the generic reading, since > there's no quantification. Yes, though I would want to say "it allows" the generic reading, rather than "gives". > "PA zo'e noi ke'a broda" quantifies over > tokens/members of the category. Thereby forcing a nongeneric (or less generic) reading (and quantification is always nonspecific). >"zo'e'e", with optional noi or no'oi, gives > specific, and "PA zo'e'e" quantifies over tokens/members of "zo'e'e". Tha= t > seems pretty straightforward... (Admittedly, not straightforward if the g= oal > is to paraphrase gadri using fairly common nonexperimental cmavo.) Yes, I think if we have "zo'e'e" then we have "le" figured out, and vice versa. But putting one in terms of the other doesn't really get to the bottom of it (at least for me). mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.