From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRD-m7HmBBoESflWuw@googlegroups.com Sat Oct 30 09:55:41 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCEiP-0005t6-FW; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:40 -0700 Received: by wwb34 with SMTP id 34sf2369546wwb.16 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:31 -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:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5ZKSzKmNablvNssy0H76z10WBImCixMag4niYr1klvg=; b=gA5Ysuh+/Hxc2+UIl1k821C2LoOnjNAUzf/SnHosMnjkHLI5ykH3xr001wpul4CS3o im+hl6yQN/84vGWM+cTemFmgsM3YJ/6fv5uFI+s/hG6el/xv7k4TEfDfANxrmea/xtQt h+y229gU6UngR1bxdM7uyh4oC3KZyK5xjeMI0= 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-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=H2OVgOAEbzU4FI7F/6pQ/Yj0YaVD+7mJVumRLOkzhamMVZrAm/UVas4k9dKhdatMlG 5BJpQjgfGbE+GvbAM9RhSOA/0Qa4sBVbXWPJjt+0ObPZEVXfcNT5fYfJplJZsM+xg4cD g7HS3iYM3FcXoAN9++mHbNMIMtPjawgblT2Pw= Received: by 10.216.157.12 with SMTP id n12mr90739wek.1.1288457726656; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:26 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.3.19 with SMTP id 19ls1405337wbl.3.p; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.147.77 with SMTP id k13mr559541wbv.18.1288457725552; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.147.77 with SMTP id k13mr559540wbv.18.1288457725507; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ww0-f48.google.com (mail-ww0-f48.google.com [74.125.82.48]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q27si1454039wbv.1.2010.10.30.09.55.24; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.48; Received: by wwb39 with SMTP id 39so2021270wwb.5 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.127.66 with SMTP id f2mr266954wbs.81.1288457724130; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.32.140 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:55:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <46808.14053.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20101027160630.GD43996@alice.local> <2b585d63-1def-4797-8c75-453e66cac098@a37g2000yqi.googlegroups.com> <201010280843.15900.jezuch@interia.pl> <2327e11e-c10a-42d4-9e8f-bc3841fd75d9@j33g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <20101028171348.GB45294@alice.local> <73ebebef-27b3-4093-8a32-1a66115a02c0@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> <46808.14053.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 13:55:24 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: mi kakne lo bajra From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 12:58 PM, John E Clifford wr= ote: > Raising is always a risky business, because it appears to involve moving = items > from a subordinate, temporary universes of discourse into the main one. So it does, but there's nothing special about raising in that. There are plenty of other ways of doing it that don't involve raising. For example: la djan cu jinvi lo du'u zasti kei lo cevni "John thinks about gods that (they) exist." By saying that, we have introduced gods into the universe of discourse through raising. But if we say instead: la djan cu jinvi lo du'u lo cevni cu zasti .i la djan cu so'e roi tavla mi lo cevni "John thinks gods exist. John often talks to me about gods." No raising there, but we have also introduced gods into the universe of discourse. Introducing things into the universe of discourse is something we all do all the time, whenever we speak. It's part and parcel of what speaking is all about. >=A0If I > say "I want for me to ride a unicorn", say, I am not at all put off by th= e > objection "There are no unicorns" because the unicorn I want is buried in= a pair > of worlds which pertain to two different counterfactual conditonals and s= o have > nothing to the universe of present discourse. =A0If I say, on the other h= and > (assuming English is something like a logical language :)), Being a logical language has nothing to do with it. You're talking about ontology, not about logic. "There are no unicorns, so you can't want one" is an ontological objection, not a logical one. And a silly one at that, from someone who thinks that it is only possible to talk about things that exist in the real/material world. > "I want a unicorn > for me to ride", I seem to be saying that there are unicorns (in the pres= ent > domain) and I want one of them to ride. The claim that there aren't any i= s then > false, even though the interlocutor has believed it true and has not agre= ed to > an expansion, as required by the rules of conversation. "Sorry, there aren't any here", or "there aren't any in this world" or "sorry, but unicorns don't exist" is a perfectly legitimate and true answer. "Universe of discourse" is not the same as "the material universe in which we exist". >=A0Indeed, his remark > might well be a reminder that the universe of the dialog does not encompa= ss > unicorns (whatever may happen in wish-worlds and the like). The universe which the dialogue is about encompasses them as soon as they are mentioned. That of course does not mean that the universe in which the dialogue takes place suddenly encompasses unicorns. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that. You can't create things into existence just by talking about them. But "the universe of the dialogue" is ambiguous, you know it, and yet you relish bringing it up every time. Why? > Further, the new > form implies that there is a unicorn I want to ride and that, even in the > expanded domain, is false, since no one unicorn is singled out by my desi= re, but > rather any one will do. I will not get drawn into that one this time. >=A0There are other problems, about the laws of identity > and the like that this move can give rise to. =A0So, as a general rule, d= on't > raise unless you are sure the referent of what you raise is already set u= p to be > talked about. In other words, "don't ever speak"? Or just "don't ever speak in Lojban"? How do you set up something to be talked about other than by mentioning it? 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.