From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBC9hf7tBBoEulK9eg@googlegroups.com Mon May 02 21:21:33 2011 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QH772-0000SV-K4; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:32 -0700 Received: by wwb13 with SMTP id 13sf11217219wwb.16 for ; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:21 -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:from:date:message-id:subject: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=NjUPozme/CdZGHvpmdgDwKd0nsGmmJr2Uavn7FWCbiM=; b=Kz06DsUhkwyHVnCki2KtBhW22TH/7tJtqBQbjo3G3wVKVJJ5nRdbEStpOCA+woX359 kY1mlTIVKaWsZjHgxvQl3uli8aBC5wdZhfOLv8ChrYwnHhr1F09esB/UuKCUWZdD3JsK cNfgCDzIsbj5HNknunH8S+u54txWHEZrnPpJo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject: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=LTKJw9MUt580OUnDKy/U9Mraw0MF3sWOWv7TFR+uZg1Rfyoe6m401Zn9o/NvpA6RjE ooB5dBh60WQk4vF1Bc7T+gDiDqXGyqAVHCivv3bPe9Bxva9dX8qqq8kv247qcABaKMCt 0PWpM+6nwrmGE4owxcKjczuB0o+A5AffpfxO8= Received: by 10.216.69.74 with SMTP id m52mr905009wed.25.1304396477797; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:17 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.7.210 with SMTP id 58ls3004eep.1.gmail; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.42.16 with SMTP id i16mr238024eeb.44.1304396476435; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.42.16 with SMTP id i16mr238023eeb.44.1304396476404; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ey0-f172.google.com (mail-ey0-f172.google.com [209.85.215.172]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l51si2174416eei.0.2011.05.02.21.21.16 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.172 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.172; Received: by eye13 with SMTP id 13so2204317eye.3 for ; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.16.89 with SMTP id g65mr3655060eeg.242.1304396476102; Mon, 02 May 2011 21:21:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.126.147 with HTTP; Mon, 2 May 2011 21:20:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <862057.19924.qm@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <862057.19924.qm@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> From: Luke Bergen Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 00:20:56 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] xorlo and default quantifiers To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.172 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@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: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e659f7329ac32404a25778e8 --0016e659f7329ac32404a25778e8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable by "I see/hear {mi viska zo'e} and assume {mi viska su'o da}" I think I am saying the same thing that xorxes said earlier. I assume that the speaker is not saying {mi viska noda} and the closest thing to that that I can thin= k of is {su'oda} On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:08 PM, John E Clifford wrot= e: > Well, I'm not sure what negating a predicate means -- putting nal- into i= ts > compound somewhere maybe -- but negating a term doesn't do that. It does > however negate the clause of which the predicate is the core. and that > negation can eventually get back to a na before the predicate, through > various changes involving naku, as have been noted. As noted, {mi citke = no > plise) is the same as (regularly transformable into and from) {mi na citk= e > su'o plise, all of which has nought to do with {lo}. > Why would you assume that {mi viska zo'e} means {mi viska su'o zo'e}? Do= es > {mi viska la Djan} really mean {mi viska su'o la Djan}? Yet these are al= l > the same type of terms and very different from, say, {su'o gerku}. > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Luke Bergen > *To:* lojban@googlegroups.com > *Sent:* Mon, May 2, 2011 6:01:50 PM > > *Subject:* Re: [lojban] xorlo and default quantifiers > > Hmm, I understood your following statement: > > No, because "no" contains a negation. If you say "mi citka" you can't > > expect people to understand that you mean "mi na citka". Similarly, if > > you say "mi citka lo plise" you can't expect anyone to understand that > > you mean "mi citka no lo plise". > > to mean that putting {no sumti} in a bridi effectively negates the selbri > such that {mi citka no plise} =3D {mi na citka ??? plise}. > > And the general point that I was trying to make was that when we say that > {lo} has no default quantifiers what we've done is merely shifted the > assumption of what we're talking about to context. > > Like you said {lo broda} =3D {zo'e noi ke'a broda}. I understand {zo'e} = as > meaning "omitted sumti which you may or may not be able to pick up on fro= m > context". So if I see {mi viska zo'e} I would assume something like {mi > viska su'o zo'e}. I certainly wouldn't assume {no} or something exotic (= but > grammatical) like {ka'o}. If {zo'e} implicitly forces a listener to make > some assumptions then so too does {lo} > > 2011/5/2 Jorge Llamb=EDas > >> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Luke Bergen >> wrote: >> > mmm, good points. I guess what I was getting at is, just because ther= e >> are >> > no default quantifiers doesn't mean that people are going to use conte= xt >> to >> > assume them. (for example, you assume that {ro lo nanmu cu bevri lo >> pipno}) >> >> No, I don't. If I assumed that each man carried the piano, then I >> would conclude that at least one of them carried it too. If I was >> forced to assume anything, it would be that none of them carried it by >> himself. (But please don't interpret that as saying that I read "lo ci >> nanmu cu bevri lo pipno" as "no lo ci nanmu cu bevri lo pipno"! Just >> because two things happen to be true does not mean that they are >> saying the same thing!) >> >> > And also that seems weird. {no} is a number just like {pa}, {re}, >> {su'o}, >> > or {so'i}. It seems weird that using it as a quantifier of a sumti ca= n >> > directly effect the selbri in ways that other numbers can't. >> >> Every quantifier affects the bridi in ways that other quantifiers >> don't, otherwise they would be the same quantifier. >> >> "no ..." is equivalent to "naku su'o ..." and also equivalent to "ro ... >> naku" >> >> "no" is not the only quantifier that contains a negation. "me'i", >> "su'e" and "da'a" also do. >> >> "me'i PA ..." is equivalent to "naku su'o PA ...", and "su'e PA ..." >> is equivalent to "naku za'u PA ..." >> >> "da'a PA ..." is equivalent to "PA ... naku" >> >> > I understand intuitively why that is the case. But it still feels >> strange. >> > I kind of have to wonder if {mi na citka lo plise} and {mi citka no >> plise} >> > really are identical (I know that the meanings of the statements are t= he >> > same, but are the statements themselves the same as each other) >> >> They are quite different, they have different meanings. I don't >> understand why you say that I said that they were identical. >> >> mu'o mi'e xorxes >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s >> "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=3Den. >> >> > -- > 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=3Den. > > -- > 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=3Den. > --=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. --0016e659f7329ac32404a25778e8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable by "I see/hear {mi viska zo'e} and assume {mi viska su'o da}&q= uot; I think I am saying the same thing that xorxes said earlier. =A0I assu= me that the speaker is not saying {mi viska noda} and the closest thing to = that that I can think of is {su'oda}

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:08 PM, John E Clif= ford <kali9put= ra@yahoo.com> wrote:
Well, I'm not sure what negating a predicate means -- putting = nal- into its compound somewhere maybe -- but negating a term doesn't d= o that.=A0 It does however negate the clause of which the predicate is the = core. and that negation can eventually get back to a na before the predicat= e, through various changes involving naku, as have been noted.=A0 As noted,= {mi citke no plise) is the same as (regularly transformable into and from)= {mi na citke su'o plise, all of which has nought to do with {lo}.
Why would you assume that {mi viska zo'e} means {mi viska su'o zo&#= 39;e}?=A0 Does {mi viska la Djan} really mean {mi viska su'o la Djan}?= =A0 Yet these are all the same type of terms and very different from, say, = {su'o gerku}.

From: Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 2, 2011 6:01:50 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] xo= rlo and default quantifiers

Hmm, I understood your following statement:
> No, because= "no" contains a negation. If you say "mi citka" you ca= n't
> expect people to understand that you mean "mi na citka". Sim= ilarly, if
> you say "mi citka lo plise" you can't expe= ct anyone to understand that
> you mean "mi citka no lo plise&qu= ot;.

to mean that putting {no sumti} in a bridi = effectively negates the selbri such that {mi citka no plise} =3D {mi na cit= ka ??? plise}. =A0

And the general point that I was trying to = make was that when we say that {lo} has no default quantifiers what we'= ve done is merely shifted the assumption of what we're talking about to= context.

Like you said {lo broda} =3D {zo'e noi = ke'a broda}. =A0I understand {zo'e} as meaning "omitted sumti = which you may or may not be able to pick up on from context". =A0So if= I see {mi viska zo'e} I would assume something like {mi viska su'o= zo'e}. =A0I certainly wouldn't assume {no} or something exotic (bu= t grammatical) like {ka'o}. =A0If {zo'e}=A0implicitly=A0forces a li= stener to make some assumptions then so too does {lo}

2011/5/2 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com= > wrote:
> mmm, good points. =A0I guess what I was getting at is, just because th= ere are
> no default quantifiers doesn't mean that people are going to use c= ontext to
> assume them. =A0(for example, you assume that {ro lo nanmu cu bevri lo= pipno})

No, I don't. If I assumed that each man carried the piano, then I=
would conclude that at least one of them carried it too. If I was
forced to assume anything, it would be that none of them carried it by
himself. (But please don't interpret that as saying that I read "l= o ci
nanmu cu bevri lo pipno" as "no lo ci nanmu cu bevri lo pipno&quo= t;! Just
because two things happen to be true does not mean that they are
saying the same thing!)

> And also that seems weird. =A0{no} is a number just like {pa}, {re}, {= su'o},
> or {so'i}. =A0It seems weird that using it as a quantifier of a su= mti can
> directly effect the selbri in ways that other numbers can't.

Every quantifier affects the bridi in ways that other quantifiers
don't, otherwise they would be the same quantifier.

"no ..." is equivalent to "naku su'o ..." and also = equivalent to "ro ... naku"

"no" is not the only quantifier that contains a negation. "m= e'i",
"su'e" and "da'a" also do.

"me'i PA ..." is equivalent to "naku su'o PA ...&quo= t;, and "su'e PA ..."
is equivalent to "naku za'u PA ..."

"da'a PA ..." is equivalent to "PA ... naku"

> I understand intuitively why that is the case. =A0But it still feels s= trange.
> =A0I kind of have to wonder if {mi na citka lo plise} and {mi citka no= plise}
> really are identical (I know that the meanings of the statements are t= he
> same, but are the statements themselves the same as each other)

They are quite different, they have different meanings. I don't understand why you say that I said that they were identical.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsub= scribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
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.
--0016e659f7329ac32404a25778e8--