From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCzvLruBBoEmN9w6A@googlegroups.com Sat May 14 08:22:41 2011 Received: from mail-qy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.216.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QLGft-0001on-Tm; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:41 -0700 Received: by qyk36 with SMTP id 36sf14027734qyk.16 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:31 -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=Z6ssm+llbBslZRK83HZxOlPlVx4563M5L7UhTQzdCqc=; b=c7ktK5k3VBgj1a/6KYnX0lMTJse2pqNonDLFYv/sZBnLuL9eOtSg42okJLr7iipCNX kEYwpeOIfU3w0fmC58t63VXpsbcX/GLHSXn6Swc4FbNbBQw49RuAruiS1QuLSf1abGLH BjL9AEG1N0sJnt2d2YTNHcVBbARL/x3Bzyh4M= 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=AKCN3ZsiFrwr4VqSgWIDDj9L4bMuiE6yx+dsda2HqoifwvtVOMxlFlGSm2QLuwSyyp WKi6vrEUIYJWjo/cyGTl+2umMhhQk7udCRUwPtcXusmQCZZ+3JAb/cP3dIWVqlgsMKvq q3R5rJ+e3mbVSql2Qf7oxWl/469FcUTeA+SG8= Received: by 10.229.41.141 with SMTP id o13mr470404qce.34.1305386547884; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:27 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.208.8 with SMTP id ga8ls948452qcb.2.gmail; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.11.36 with SMTP id r36mr260036qcr.18.1305386547146; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.11.36 with SMTP id r36mr260035qcr.18.1305386547126; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f173.google.com ([209.85.220.173]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fz1si588961qcb.10.2011.05.14.08.22.27 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.173; Received: by vxb37 with SMTP id 37so2799441vxb.4 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.179.131 with SMTP id dg3mr3903721vdc.9.1305386546689; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.185.167 with HTTP; Sat, 14 May 2011 08:22:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 12:22:26 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] "lo no" 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 209.85.220.173 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 I agree with the gist of tijlan's post, but I'd like to add some observations. On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 7:56 AM, tijlan wrote: > > lo gerku = da poi gerku I prefer: lo gerku = zo'e noi gerku The reason is that "da" is meaningless until it is bound by a quantifier, and assuming a default "su'o" has the problem that quantifiers in Lojban are usually taken to bind singular variables (i.e. they are distributive). > ci lo gerku = ci da poi gerku > no lo gerku = no da poi gerku Here I prefer: ci lo gerku = ci da poi me lo gerku no lo gerku = no da poi me lo gerku This is just an application of a more general rule: PA (sumti) = PA da poi me (sumti) Now, it is generally true that the selbri "me lo broda" can be reduced to plain "broda" (as far as the x1 is concerned). But the exception is precisely in the cases when there are no broda in the universe of discourse. Since there are no broda in those cases, the sumti "lo broda" can't refer to anything, but the selbri "broda" could perhaps still have meaning. This won't affect tijlan's point though. I would accept that: ci gerku = ci da poi gerku no gerku = no da poi gerku since these follow a different paradigm, with no referring term being involved. > lo ci gerku = da poi gerku je cimei > lo no gerku = da poi gerku je nomei lo ci gerku = zo'e noi gerku gi'e cimei lo no gerku = zo'e noi gerku gi'e nomei > Every sentence is syntactically valid, but the last one is logically > questionable. You are yet to explain how exactly one could sensibly > mean to refer to something which are both dogs and no dogs without a > contradiction. He is not referring to anything with "lo no gerku". "nomei" is not true of anything, just as "su'omei" is true of anything at all. He accepts terms that don't refer to anything, and arbitrarily assigns a truth value of "True" to any predication involving those terms. But those sentences don't really mean anything. He is extracting meaning not from what the sentence states but from the fact that he is using a non-referring term. 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.