From lojban+bncCNf8pM-bDBDrlcHuBBoEnFCUEA@googlegroups.com Sun May 15 14:51:53 2011 Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QLjE6-00049I-5t; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:53 -0700 Received: by vws2 with SMTP id 2sf1830515vws.16 for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z6mOk9rOL63J2kHf/52XiHYDziOaNG1P/qX9cu7D19A=; b=jaxrItuZVX/oWJ2dyvrHLJB3pRLepBa87rurvu7eCJwDCLDwciYpEgXODVwGnmIcI5 2CBtw9kI4Iliaytk+2VFTaQDjFHKzxdUc9DQt3XlchW9C3mpnOoprhAgjef5Rij5Qk83 wt3DQN9PSNJGLI0YnB3wvg30p9FexBM1msy/s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=uiH4CatHts3D1PZODKo71XxsqB/0/H71Hjcx/LwAgqFwmwTb05HC+ghLZiN3z8c0e8 n9yllz+3JnXVep4wI+lcpgSHWdbg35qxFa1l98BsXH6hBa+irQ5CUkEF/1efRvST8B/c +a97hqDgaJtFFqXNm6dJgsxJylUcffXRR0YpY= Received: by 10.220.5.139 with SMTP id 11mr315416vcv.21.1305496299355; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:39 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.221.1.19 with SMTP id no19ls427289vcb.3.gmail; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.181.201 with SMTP id bz9mr596182vcb.19.1305496298339; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.181.201 with SMTP id bz9mr596181vcb.19.1305496298318; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.216.179]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t9si150277vch.11.2011.05.15.14.51.38 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.179; Received: by mail-qy0-f179.google.com with SMTP id 7so2419266qyk.3 for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.90.68 with SMTP id h4mr2766707qcm.58.1305496298163; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.29.74 with HTTP; Sun, 15 May 2011 14:51:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 22:51:38 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] "lo no" From: tijlan To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: paskios@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.179 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=paskios@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 15 May 2011 15:58, Michael Turniansky wrote: > =A0 Although xorxes and John Clifford seem to understand my point (whethe= r or > not they agree), I am least happy that I am formulating my POV in a > comprehensible manner.=A0 And yet, here I am being sucked in again, becau= se > you refuse to leave it go. I'm trying to test out my understanding of the Lojban quantification, rather than not to. >> > Of course, since you do believe that, I hope you are prepared, >> > because all of the trained assassins I am sending your way are deadly. >> > You better start worrying about their cardinality. >> >> "all of the trained assassins" (ro lo broda), given no context, can >> mean one thousand (ki'o lo broda) or none (no lo broda) or else. In >> any case, it refers to "the trained assassins" (lo broda), something >> -- not nothing, not nomei. > > =A0 Then I leave you with a question.=A0 If broda =3D "the trained assass= ins that > I am sending your way", Then "no lo xo broda"?=A0 If you insist I can onl= y > send you zero OF some trained assassins, then how many assassins am I > sending you none OF? I don't know. More pertinent to my point isn't how many assassins there are, but whether the sumti is referring to something or nothing. > Please quanitfy that number for me. > For whether you > know the answer or not (or indeed, whether one CAN=A0 know what the answe= r is > or not), there must be some answer to it. Whether or not I know the answer would determine whether or not I could truthfully quantify the number (should there be any objective answer to it at all). I don't know 'the answer'; are you asking me to arbitrarily make one up? There need not be any exact number as 'the answer' to "lo xo broda" in order for "lo broda" to be a reference to broda1, something, whose primal contrast to nothing is what has been at stake in my comments. The dichotomy of "some quantity / no quantity" precedes the particulars of "some quantity", such as "one" and "three". "One thing" differs from "zero thing" primarily in that it is something as opposed to nothing; "three things" differ from "zero thing" primarily in that they are both individually and collectively something as opposed to nothing; and so on. As far as cardinality is concerned, the difference between "zero" and "some" is more primitive than the difference between "zero" and positive integers. The fact that "some" can be meaningful in primitive terms of "non-zero" rather than of such particulars as "one" or "three", warrants the act of making reference to something with no provision for its specific total quantity. In Lojban, only "no" can exactly quantify nothing, and all non-"no" cardinalities can be defined by means of contrast to "no": "nonai". If I had to fill the inner quantifier for "no lo xo broda" from your example, I might say "nonai". > You can always state an inner and outer qualifier. That might be the case. mu'o --=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.