From lojban+bncCML0xpmUARCnm7vxBBoEuDH7yw@googlegroups.com Tue Jul 26 07:22:46 2011 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QliWw-0004hM-2r; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:46 -0700 Received: by wyh13 with SMTP id 13sf1456500wyh.16 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; 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; bh=9A86KXHvVBqIuxjdEFKQkasprsmpZIH7W5imUzGZMhw=; b=Oa8dJz/jlVD6U8iXNFQnnrhMXG2ANnVTRR8/ewvcYEYCqB0P2Hj1MeCiJxT8P2reJP xLidi6x0lQ54tCmOiG1YwoTIekzFQUNwCiWayyU2BLv7WT/SXtKjNY+/3zvSXVHV9N77 HIlC03k+Gzv1DOKdNX+QvNjlc7XZ+591a/0qU= Received: by 10.216.209.8 with SMTP id r8mr855907weo.22.1311690151151; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:31 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.106.37 with SMTP id v37ls3454286wbo.1.gmail; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.149.221 with SMTP id u29mr413089wbv.12.1311690149658; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.149.221 with SMTP id u29mr413088wbv.12.1311690149626; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:29 -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 c25si1000092wbp.1.2011.07.26.07.22.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:29 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@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 26so505442wwf.10 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.21.220 with SMTP id k28mr7591679fab.63.1311690149383; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.74.194 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 07:22:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87BB9A86-430F-4F64-9CD4-D8A5BD33B69A@yahoo.com> References: <87BB9A86-430F-4F64-9CD4-D8A5BD33B69A@yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 10:22:29 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] bu'a From: Ian Johnson To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: blindbravado@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=blindbravado@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=00151747b19a68cf0604a8f9a916 --00151747b19a68cf0604a8f9a916 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Quantification over predicates was implemented in a horrifyingly hackish way. This alone is a problem, in my opinion. There is also, at least not in the main body of the language, an easy way to go from predicate-as-function (selbri) to predicate-as-concrete-object (typical sumti) to predicate-as-abstract-object. Lojban is definitely based on FOPL, though, not SOPL, and not a bizarre hybrid of the two. mu'o mi'e latros On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 2:51 PM, John E. Clifford wrote: > Lojban isn't clearly of one order or the other, since it treats sets and > properties and the like on a par with tree and dogs. There is no particular > problem in grammar or vocabulary to treating properties of predicates and > quantification over them. There are some arguments about the correct way to > express a predicate as an argument, but that seems to revolve around just > what a predicate is in Lojban ontology. All the answers yield grammatical > and intelligible results, though sometimes different ones. None of them > seem particularly stilted, but I haven't seen enough cases to get a feel for > that. > > Sent from my iPad > > On Jul 24, 2011, at 14:13, Ian Johnson wrote: > > I think bu'a/bu'e/bu'i would be much much much more useful if Lojban were a > second order language, because then we could talk about the existence of > predicates with desired properties in a non-stilted fashion. As a first > order language, though, with second order mechanisms requiring stilted > language, I don't think bu'a/bu'e/bu'i are especially useful. > > mu'o mi'e latros > > On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 12:01 PM, tijlan < > jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote: > >> What is your view on the bu'a series? Potentially useful? Totally >> pointless? I've never used it myself, but I could be missing some >> important aspect of Lojban as a logical language. >> >> mu'o mi'e tijlan >> >> -- >> 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. >> >> > -- > 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. > > -- > 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. > -- 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. --00151747b19a68cf0604a8f9a916 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Quantification over predicates was implemented in a horrifyingly hackish wa= y. This alone is a problem, in my opinion. There is also, at least not in t= he main body of the language, an easy way to go from predicate-as-function = (selbri) to predicate-as-concrete-object (typical sumti) to predicate-as-ab= stract-object.

Lojban is definitely based on FOPL, though, not SOPL, and not a bizarre= hybrid of the two.

mu'o mi'e latros

On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 2:51 PM, John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com&g= t; wrote:
Lojban isn= 9;t clearly of one order or the other, since it treats sets and properties = and the like on a par with tree and dogs. =A0There is no particular problem= in grammar or vocabulary to treating properties of predicates and quantifi= cation over them. =A0There are some arguments about the correct way to expr= ess a predicate as an argument, but that seems to revolve around just what = a predicate is in Lojban ontology. =A0All the answers yield grammatical and= intelligible results, though sometimes different ones. =A0None of them see= m particularly stilted, but I haven't seen enough cases to get a feel f= or that.

Sent from my iPad

= On Jul 24, 2011, at 14:13, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:

I think bu'a/bu'e/bu'i would be much much muc= h more useful if Lojban were a second order language, because then we could= talk about the existence of predicates with desired properties in a non-st= ilted fashion. As=A0a first order language, though, with second order mecha= nisms requiring stilted language, I don't think bu'a/bu'e/bu= 9;i are especially useful.
=A0
mu'o mi'e latros
=A0
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 12:01 PM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.c= om> wrote:
What is your view on the bu'a ser= ies? Potentially useful? Totally
pointless? I've never used it mysel= f, but I could be missing some
important aspect of Lojban as a logical language.

mu'o mi'e = tijlan

--
You received this message becau= se 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@googlegr= oups.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 &= quot;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/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.
--00151747b19a68cf0604a8f9a916--