From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCI3OXnBBoE4a5fIQ@googlegroups.com Fri Dec 03 14:24:23 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1POe39-0008FX-Ds; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:23 -0800 Received: by wwb17 with SMTP id 17sf5986790wwb.16 for ; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:12 -0800 (PST) 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; bh=/T6IHrNc5GYUffYNnyQujCnY1QYKCH1N/K4V4pBIYlQ=; b=yq2ZoE6M4f6soYqoS9wiw7UpJqaPVK35ZlBqx+0PZd1bDMhnWQf1r5JmN+xurqyrRS LzibAdIWqCoFkWsarY2CLnfBUdlpea3J3xLx5Qnq10V44AeQFA/3PKtwAXWoEtztQjbX w/16egDRAyWlNhGOZQWplAbERVAMB52J7Jxuo= 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; b=ok3tojelQiAxnyYInk2l4xR6wcBffjtEs8AD1UQNRjwnXHm4mj4jMJh7CRpq/Cv/N+ 8IB4L+RBQqCLu5aIO0HwD6A52lxzj+qulzbsbhHKz3KmpsiGdTj50K02nzpyGdHgUWBi kopKVsjxwxFKQ8qpeIyU5VjVPqwDNWIgS6Pp4= Received: by 10.216.45.202 with SMTP id p52mr180301web.1.1291415048505; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:08 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.226.148 with SMTP id b20ls868996weq.0.p; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.154.196 with SMTP id h46mr65124wek.9.1291415047400; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.154.196 with SMTP id h46mr65123wek.9.1291415047223; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wy0-f170.google.com (mail-wy0-f170.google.com [74.125.82.170]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id m20si262732weq.11.2010.12.03.14.24.06; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:06 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.170; Received: by mail-wy0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 39so1871830wyb.1 for ; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.156.21 with SMTP id u21mr2612236wbw.9.1291415045295; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.39.139 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Dec 2010 14:24:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 19:24:05 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] zo'u is inconsistent 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 74.125.82.170 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 On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Ian Johnson wrote: > {zo'u} works like this if I understand correctly: > > PA da PA de ... zo'u -> quantifying da de ... > PA bu'a PA bu'e ... zo'u -> quantifying bu'a bu'e ... > zo'u -> defining the topic in an imprecisely defined sense Minor terminological quibble: It is not "zo'u" that does these things. All that "zo'u" does is separate the prenex terms from the matrix terms. It's the quantifiers that do the quantifying, and what they quantify is a bridi (the one appearing as the matrix), not the variables that they bind. But your substantive point, that quantification over selbri is a complete and utter hack, is correct. I too have sort of complained about this in the past. Nobody really cares. Nobody actually uses "bu'a"s anyway. The use of the prenex for topic terms I don't really find problematic. You can even think of the domains of quantification as some kind of topic, so that part is not really too inconsistent. mu'o mi'e xorxes -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.