From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCH7oTvBBoEq91pOg@googlegroups.com Sat May 28 10:55:32 2011 Received: from mail-qw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.216.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QQNjV-000759-R9; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:32 -0700 Received: by qwh5 with SMTP id 5sf4448123qwh.16 for ; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:24 -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 :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:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=BRA15wficbQHXxCyYniNdV2Oxz5QV4BXutRLS40Xwho=; b=pJ+monJxpj0TmavxKxy6UHU5ki2/60Rs2nQQcBPr5bpYKgv6UxJ1tTzxWG1v+Bivdw qHUWgK2tA0plRWrftqvfG0O7N3ILY7hcWjNo2nVNS158xWg0v/tk6fbm3V5vp0WaaypP +eUi3cf/F4yt3tQPxo8mRBmkyHgkGuVCLFotM= 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=5pGq+k6N9tPIJglLtfYZYxtrkQpTE4NX0LKmxKqdO9kXDD3JG2FBovkbsm6Ak4W2bN ZUY28GRN15B30RZ/86SjPnfLShcd1XXIWGYiDixNYqicTZ5wzx4+vTdtgXyMEVx7iLi9 Qi8DJBlUlJU1eDkIyMrhtSo4fibRLWZ9z4z7M= Received: by 10.224.212.198 with SMTP id gt6mr940854qab.6.1306605319202; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:19 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.224.138.148 with SMTP id a20ls715503qau.5.gmail; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.211.201 with SMTP id gp9mr1114585qab.2.1306605318919; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.211.201 with SMTP id gp9mr1114584qab.2.1306605318907; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k32si2478387qcs.1.2011.05.28.10.55.18 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.53; Received: by vws13 with SMTP id 13so2554030vws.40 for ; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.176.3 with SMTP id ce3mr4595267vdc.313.1306605318450; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.183.129 with HTTP; Sat, 28 May 2011 10:55:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <08d1ce1c-1d1c-451f-abbe-5e7f99ea79e1@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> <980254.25606.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 14:55:18 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] "part of things" fallacy 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 209.85.212.53 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: 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 On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 2:19 PM, .arpis. wrote: > The "lo no" discussion got above my head rather quickly. > > Is a relatively simple summary possible? There was the question of whether "lo no broda" refers to something or to nothing (i.e. does not refer to anything, not "refers to some thing called 'nothing'"). Assuming it doesn't refer to anything, the next question was whether it can be used as a statement that there are no broda. Normally you don't use a sumti to make a statement, but the use of a sumti carries certain presuppositions with it. The use of "lo PA broda" carries with it the presupposition that there are PA broda, and thus some people would argue that it is legitimate to use "lo no broda" to covertly transmit that presupposition, even though you are not using the sumti in its natural role of pointing to the things about which you are going to say something. The "fractional quantifiers" was something of a tangent, I think it's a completely different issue from the no-as-cardinality issue. 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.