From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRCe8cHeBBoEFzDm0A@googlegroups.com Thu Apr 22 09:26:40 2010 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1O4zET-0003V5-Ck; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:39 -0700 Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5sf7885569gyd.16 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:21 -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:message-id:x-ymail-osg:received :x-mailer:references:date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OEiK1N49ZE4c6bj6WgnlSzKgK7ZaQ72u+aeAQXVgADI=; b=SOMWPBD2O49qbXmYiRU0oQO+CurW8C4q0CT5RcD43pCq5m8D/LgCIqOZJGVpYrYqeQ AxdJ4DIeyqGr1Ykm4pCJStCqSPbUqtn/UN3BG7dN7bTsmtUsggCcOZOMJNhOKPi1tigB dk0oZfxfoqpgG2eiUygHyHPEXCcHjXktuyT2A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references :date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=r8O4cQFwOI7kzEN7A5pVUxHVdemJVjWMQCOoZpofGRkwEdkhHlUGV6+GUWvRBUyLLC l0XdmlpAIoZtNAi5Obx1EaGytn8F1Ep2zGWbmy+QV8hS1+SUelCD8dpWTGt+VYqnpqj6 +C63BVUf37+XCDDo6UhWNU93V2YEY2pmEt7A8= Received: by 10.101.128.18 with SMTP id f18mr982576ann.58.1271953566240; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:06 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.168.36 with SMTP id v36ls23435618ano.4.p; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.170.15 with SMTP id x15mr7354971ano.30.1271953564940; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.170.15 with SMTP id x15mr7354970ano.30.1271953564862; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.199.120]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id 11si11714gxk.9.2010.04.22.09.26.03; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.120 as permitted sender) client-ip=68.142.199.120; Received: (qmail 51602 invoked by uid 60001); 22 Apr 2010 16:26:03 -0000 Message-ID: <402483.50291.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: Ung4ZXkVM1niZELYvQFpg4eXQ0JR0LY7cyhFwfdK2_GXnN2 c7luikbQx1OySxytdLutcQovW4fswo80fapkOT4GUnZ25rGfx4bFjOLMeVMN 4Ca9n3994D28eRV9NcEnhByYdDdZu0BXrUx.J59mau23Du758sx.qXO.Yzfu qbtlZM76hx01.d4mftRS_P.wkV4aLR7qmLH.BDIqePdGlNOKH3QmymObw9Je XALrQnM7lXoCuN3civilcjWb0ImByndEn2096D0ybC0nwRAfyOfA9EG.y8Pv HpTj__szt3dZQHOoR61hFBZYwGtOrldvWpJsRQ2CGqMd8f1ntMRTkk6ufHXD qdb5OWK3jW.jWgHy4fjcKEtKgx6ODwMaji7YB Received: from [71.14.73.129] by web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:03 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/348.5 YahooMailWebService/0.8.102.267879 References: <6a2c862a-91f0-452e-9a31-0064620d5d06@g11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> <75805.51342.qm@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <934390.40893.qm@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <391970.26672.qm@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <225049.90411.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <734238.40743.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4BD060B7.5020903@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 09:26:03 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] About plural 'ro' To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: <4BD060B7.5020903@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.120 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.com X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, as noted, if those groups, bunches, whatever, are L-sets, then they c= orrespond exactly to the plural quantification in McKay's book. Part of th= e question now is whether that is what plural quantification means in Lojba= n -- and perhaps just what the consequences of all this is in practice. T= o take a case in point 'lo bevri be lo plano' (where did we get that word?)= refers to several things or a bunch. Now the things, which must be things= that carry a piano, turn out in the hypothetical case we are looking at, t= o be pluralities or bunches (it takes at least three of the five participan= ts to carry the piano). So, then, what satisfies 'me lo bevri be lo plano'?= What is obviously there are the sixteen groups, whether bunches or just p= luralities, of three or more participants. xorxes apparently is claiming t= hat the right answer is just the three participants themselves, in spite of= the fact that they don't satisfy the defining predicate. I suppose you could claim that, since each of these groups satisfies the predicate, = then the things that satisfy the predicate is the union of these, which wou= ld, in fact reduce the group of participants. But this looks perilous: tho= ugh I can't come up with a good case where it is clearly wrong, I also can'= t prove that it is correct. One attempt along this line might be to consid= er that, while all the threesomes and foursomes actually carried the piano,= the fivesome did not. The union would be the same, but the referent of th= e term would again be a plurality that did not in fact meet the property (a= nd, in general, the fact that something unioned in has a property does not = mean that the union does). , On the other hand, what xorxes pulls out is th= e right thing for the case and the question then is, where did he get it. ----- Original Message ---- From: And Rosta To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, April 22, 2010 9:44:07 AM Subject: Re: [lojban] About plural 'ro' Jorge Llamb=EDas, On 22/04/2010 02:13: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 8:38 PM, John E Clifford w= rote: > (Not that it makes any difference if you want to talk about bunches, > it's just that it is not necessary to invoke bunches.) >=20 >> -- and of course, carrying a piano is very different from being in a gro= up, even if the group is carrying a piano. >=20 > Right, all that matters is that they carry the piano. It's not > necessary to decide whether they are a group or not, and it is > certainly not necessary to call them a group even if they are one. If every possibly combination of individuals constitutes a group/bunch/set/= collectivity, so that there is no doubt over the definitiion, is it necessa= ry, and is it advantageous, to invoke plural quantification/predication?=20 --And. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s "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. =20 --=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.