From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRCH1pjpBBoETLVOaA@googlegroups.com Thu Jan 06 12:51:03 2011 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PawnS-0007Di-3H; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:51:03 -0800 Received: by wyb35 with SMTP id 35sf18392018wyb.16 for ; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:50:50 -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:message-id:x-ymail-osg:received :x-mailer:references:date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :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=KxVvclxv5jnTAjSdnzT2NVEJImWtOiE/7fay9S4qQOw=; b=BukMQL4l9hKfzDpNIJ75krtCv1ri0QpdL6S4TGkpaiqANgr/JPVavDiT470Lr8dkcG 5Ns462kUFtNYXicYvYPmm47XnbVkoFAa5jYw1w00CP1SJTgk8RR/7DW/Y38LF+o5Xs9K ZnoX1a+i4Z5VdxKDAYrbfRk6MYPEURxwFkuXc= 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-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=QOG5nttmFadmLrDLRaHAWKF9LuVLk4PPxAF6I8KY7/80n+Zs31l8e8TPIWzpt1VmGJ POOGKXTCJtUQIzOTCLayeK0d2O4plR3XkObK7/YRxdCbSaJkFnlE8ynWnRY8U3ZEu7rU Nfdv0MNVz5SrcjhWX/CaP6bE1anOdtg/Z98GU= Received: by 10.216.72.65 with SMTP id s43mr310515wed.1.1294347015711; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:50:15 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.26.28 with SMTP id b28ls1103312eea.5.p; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:50:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.14.37.77 with SMTP id x53mr311875eea.19.1294347014830; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:50:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.14.37.77 with SMTP id x53mr311874eea.19.1294347014807; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:50:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.199.122]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id t6si612511eeh.4.2011.01.06.12.50.13; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:50:13 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.122 as permitted sender) client-ip=68.142.199.122; Received: (qmail 19803 invoked by uid 60001); 6 Jan 2011 20:49:10 -0000 Message-ID: <121469.10625.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: _2cDQm8VM1mMV9qZ33FL8cj_i6a4sNFLI4Bb.sNTe..R6cU WEyuq3rPH8O43DjwjiLYNtEa1PCm6E4ELvQp8Tem8DG_FPNj8Mv_LoY01sFn zkYLwP9jbFzQNq5cUM3z3Npx6LWtH0KKQxMma5mJwabskXS6dKnruCzAOT2e R_P_KHdB4Oh.AWH95cgiCI9fbTQW54W6wEt21Tz2wbUD2d7QuAyuuyeAOpXf 68H5m1LKNmxN6WHxeb.Q1aMWITirftz9WpVPY09GQJBmAoKfmT6WEgkVbkni .pJ06FKoK.c6zXYu5BW7lfw0oKKyIR1iCTwDqeHAyNAFpcLOXehaWij2OmKt JOa_JUsPeXhumEDJl0MUmywI.Fc2fplbDJ3OGTz8MdQ4Ox.oPB77vrC8I8rN UqSk0Q0sWFDLpLmA- Received: from [99.92.110.13] by web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:49:09 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/553 YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.285259 References: <20110105220532.GN17534@digitalkingdom.org> <4D25D915.9080305@lojban.org> <4D25F6F2.7050205@gmail.com> <20110106171943.GZ17534@digitalkingdom.org> <4D260F63.7090101@gmail.com> <20110106190153.GB23787@digitalkingdom.org> <4D26227D.4080207@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 12:49:09 -0800 (PST) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! (was Re: [lojban] Re: Vote for the Future Global Language) To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: <4D26227D.4080207@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.122 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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 ----- Original Message ---- From: And Rosta To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, January 6, 2011 2:13:49 PM Subject: Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! (was Re: [lojban] Re: Vote for the Future Global Language) Robin Lee Powell, On 06/01/2011 19:01: > On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 06:52:19PM +0000, And Rosta wrote: >> Robin Lee Powell, On 06/01/2011 17:19: >>> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 05:08:02PM +0000, And Rosta wrote: >>>> >>>> In English, logical scope tends to be ambiguous, at least within >>>> the same clause. So English "not A, B and C" can mean "It is not >>>> the case that each of A,B,C is the case" or "For each x, where x >>>> is one of A,B,C, it is not the case that x is the case". >>>> >>>> Unless it has been fixed by recent BPFK action, Lojban has >>>> *exactly the same ambiguity* with regard to logical scope >>>> between elements that are not explicitly prenexed. >>> >>> Show me an example please. >> >> "su'o broda ro brode cu brodi" >> >> "na ku a bu e by e cy cu broda" >> >> Ten years ago these were ambiguous. > > You're going to have to hold my hand more than that, I'm afraid. > Ambiguous how? In the case of the second one, ambiguous between the two meanings the English version has: "It is not the case that A, B and C broda" versus "For each of A,B,C it is not the case that it brodas". But the Lojban isn't ambiguous in this way and hasn't been even in Loglan back as far as I can remember. The fact that I can't remember which way the rule runs or what the override technique is doesn't mean they aren't in place. >> Xorxes proposed a rule that items in higher clauses have scope >> over items in lower clauses (i.e. that items export to the prenex >> of the localmost clause) and that when two items are in the same >> clause, the leftward element has scope over the rightward. (It's a >> shame to have to 'pollute' the purely hierarchical structure of >> logical form with left-to-right order of forms, but it's by far >> the simplest way to rescue Lojban in its (then) current state. >> Perhaps the BPFK has made xorxes's rule official, in which case I >> wonder what happened to the rule about the scope of selbri tcita >> "na", and to the scope of selbri tcita in general.) > > I didn't know that was xorxes' rule; I thought left-to-right > quantifier scope was in the CLL. Yes, indeed: > http://dag.github.com/cll/16/5/ "The rule for dropping the prenex is > simple: if the variables appear in the same order within the bridi > as they did in the prenex, then the prenex is superfluous.". > > So, I'm probably failing to understand. Can you please explain it > like I'm very very stupid? My mistake -- failure of memory. Presumably the then-unofficial rule was to generalize CLL's left-to-right rule for all elements in the bridi (with the possible exception of some or all selbri tcita) and to make explicit the rule that things export to the localmost rather than outermost prenex (when you have one bridi within another). **I also don't see what your example has to do with the rule you miss: since ancient Loglan times the rule is that the quantifiers come out in order and here there is not problems of subordinate clauses. --And. -- 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. -- 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.