From lojban+bncCNuStaWoDxC25cruBBoETRXyog@googlegroups.com Tue May 17 10:39:17 2011 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QMOEk-0002HU-Cm; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:17 -0700 Received: by wya21 with SMTP id 21sf1138175wya.16 for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-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:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GQYNGoYLOsRvffnegyQ5r/QpKNVKEdpSzsl1W/UGqnc=; b=vnWJwy3/zq5kChX5A0wxXosFZYbLbdw5vfV6qAAKk3e0i8Xx5SJrjxjpfJRzeNyMcw NEAcjlCG/e495vLBeQ1704SeWzuXRFg/Q3CMhwKT0fJ1+q47aA2Usep8mmPcV6E2WSds Seq/X6lt15/YWlsYqG67sAGEepyxn/XtU50Ds= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-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:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=EqzBCdFLwwtraJyC4DmPXtrzNVGe5SQjPsyOcAFOztTql48R9i+YnQO2eE/8ybFD4r xT8pqhiafbhRTS5PIeaAmW7lvk0WHpzylZLe+OxBXBJDnTpqLjuFuh+oLS4F5e899QSb ryGMUWpAUB2qoqqo7W+BxXPQ3Dy/WZAccn9Q0= Received: by 10.216.64.200 with SMTP id c50mr163190wed.9.1305653942872; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:02 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.95.10 with SMTP id b10ls2247373wbn.3.gmail; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.200.77 with SMTP id ev13mr62647wbb.10.1305653941569; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.200.77 with SMTP id ev13mr62646wbb.10.1305653941550; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r19si200333wbg.1.2011.05.17.10.39.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.53; Received: by mail-ww0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 40so766088wwj.10 for ; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.156.20 with SMTP id u20mr927438wbw.7.1305653941239; Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [80.192.144.173] (cpc2-pres4-0-0-cust172.pres.cable.virginmedia.com [80.192.144.173]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z13sm474117wbd.12.2011.05.17.10.38.59 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 17 May 2011 10:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DD2B2B2.5010901@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 18:38:58 +0100 From: And Rosta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Masses References: <340069.36890.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <406208.54874.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4DD277B1.3090503@gmail.com> <1052.65956.qm@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4DD290A5.7080801@gmail.com> <464297.91439.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <464297.91439.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Fine yes, as long as the equivalence (in Lojban, with lo) of "The boy(s) mo= ved the piano" and "The mover(s) of the piano were boys" is accepted. John E Clifford, On 17/05/2011 16:37: > Yes, we don't have to say exactly what a broda is (any brodacea of the ge= nus > brobroda, ...) but I still think it has to insist that the referent of {l= o > broda} be broda. This allows for some disagreement about just what count= s, but, > for each side, the answer excludes certain [whatever]s from being lo brod= a. > "The boys moved the piano" can be pretty indefinite about how that was do= ne, who > hefted what, and so on, maybe even including some who didn't lift a finge= r, but > the boys had better be boys in some fairly clear sense (which may include= girls > and adults, of course, depending). > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: And Rosta > To: lojban@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tue, May 17, 2011 10:13:41 AM > Subject: Re: [lojban] Masses > > Yes, there is this question that you raise, which might be answered by > philosophers of mereology or by the wisdom of lojban-speaking crowds. But= the > specification of Lojban shouldn't rely on the question having been answer= ed. To > give another example, the Lojban specification points from {gerku} to the > encyclopedia entry for dogs, but Lojban doesn't have to be responsible fo= r > stating the content of that encyolopedia entry (which is rather a job for > zoologists, or folk crowds). > > --And. > > John E Clifford, On 17/05/2011 15:58: >> Hmmm! This seems to be part and parcel of the issue of who all gets the > credit >> or blame. To take the team example again, when the team wins (or loses)= , does >> that include the manager, the bat boy, the groundskeeper, etc.? Since > managers >> regularly get credit or blame, they seem to be part of the teams, yet th= ere is >> an obvious sense in which they are not (usually). xorxes wants armies t= o be >> more than soldiers, to include in materiel, soldiers' tools -- are thes= e >> different meanings of "army" or different restrictions on what to count = in > when >> making a particular claim? And does it make a difference? I think (on = first >> or >> early second thought) that it does: there has to be some limit on what {= lo >> broda} allows in, else we can have lo broda consisting of many things th= at are >> not broda and only one that is. This seems to make it essentially le br= oda > and >> deny veridicality, the distinguishing mark of {lo} constructions. >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: And Rosta >> To: lojban@googlegroups.com >> Sent: Tue, May 17, 2011 8:27:13 AM >> Subject: Re: [lojban] Masses >> >> Jorge Llamb=EDas, On 15/05/2011 22:00: >>> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:33 PM, John E Clifford >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Since the distributive sense can always be expressed by the use >>>> of external quantifiers, there was no need for a special form for that= . So >> the >>>> unquantified form could be used for the collective sense. However, it= was >>>> thought (and practice shows this was a correct thought), that there wa= s also >>>> needed a neutral expression, unmarked for either collective or distrib= utive. >>> >>> Also, if "collective" means "all together" and "distributive" means >>> "one by one" or "individually", there are a lot of other options in >>> between: in pairs, in threes, some in pairs and some individually, and >>> so on. "All together" and "one by one" are just the two extremes. If >>> we only have forms for the extremes we are left with no form for all >>> the intermediate cases, and if we do have a form that doesn't >>> distinguish between all the intermediate possibilities there is no >>> reason to exclude one of the extremes from that neutral form. >> >> This is a good point, but if you agree that "the team" is subject to sam= e > range >> of interpretations on the collective--distributive scale as "the team me= mbers" >> is (e.g. "the team each have red hair"), then I think the appropriate >> conclusion >> is (a) that when an individual is construed as a collectivity it may rec= eive >> wholly or partly distributive readings (quantifying over members or subs= ets of >> the collectivity), and (b) individual-construable-as-collectivity is the >> default >> (most underspecified) interpretation. >> >> To try to state essentially the same point in a completely different way= : just >> as brodeing holds of the referentage of "lo broda" to any degree on the >> coll--dist scale, so does "brodaing". On the plural reference model, "lo > broda" >> has many referents, and it needn't be the case that each is brode; my po= int it >> that it also needn't be the case that each is broda. >> >> I'm not sure if you already agree with this point. >> >> --And. >> > --=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.