From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRDcltvxBBoE_klaiQ@googlegroups.com Mon Aug 01 08:51:09 2011 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Qnuli-0002fX-HK; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:51:08 -0700 Received: by gxk3 with SMTP id 3sf8610484gxk.16 for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:50:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-yahoo-newman-property:x-yahoo-newman-id :x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references:message-id:date:from:subject:to :in-reply-to:mime-version: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=GHGmLhK102nV6aPkX68B1S1zWjVZHckg2c+WVwZyooU=; b=Nc+ZySEtA3gB3EqK+a79penVx/wDpXeII4oBhoE5vXQQgb2rwCMhsG5Zsm/vyHwaLj hsFHZ4Jnbyp679NEDBgOZl/PiKZTI0wGUWwKASmaNme0PtQwKxdXvpgb7ffgnd2+DHo3 Tdxe7/FK6KroAKfcYxRgsTspDdfghyib1Mfc0= Received: by 10.100.237.6 with SMTP id k6mr611547anh.18.1312213852212; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:50:52 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.8.11 with SMTP id l11ls5177046ani.7.gmail; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.2.17 with SMTP id e17mr3236629ani.15.1312213850604; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.2.17 with SMTP id e17mr3236628ani.15.1312213850576; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm18.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm18.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com [66.94.237.219]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id c2si105612ano.0.2011.08.01.08.50.50; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.237.219 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.237.219; Received: from [66.94.237.199] by nm18.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Aug 2011 15:50:50 -0000 Received: from [66.94.237.124] by tm10.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Aug 2011 15:50:50 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1029.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Aug 2011 15:50:50 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 263209.55084.bm@omp1029.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 92021 invoked by uid 60001); 1 Aug 2011 15:50:50 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: g71rcj0VM1kRa5tBEZDRhe.7gkdiAF7U0cYve0a1MCiqunT 2WZ3bvltV7uPKcCfd43vY8etF7Mp_Z1d4fHWn6XfulyMOtnlRMd1ch3e7ag0 2IObBsyAIDUg3jMN8MRyINWBjwStxouqiJsH631OJPEpatHHj.SYJ0G.IcOX TCdDbHtsApM__73pdvqlu5IK.hNDrOW.pXT_yeP1tONpsZRqz7d_qo_UvGY8 16R_t2uS8DXYNiYGYwn1FLOHQP45IdjQGKaea2Chp7bOpmpqAsZJES.NHIOS ShthAv8ustlqYR8pDLGoBh2biPY6n8y3XVxXHLzc92JRzY6zEt7MEy3YOxZp c7HRxO2ASsGu.O3DWXW4sdwvQp7rT2C7gJLd2PJ2ez.Gy7nkpuqL53mA8JPe 1VblvWqXbra1W5CbmyCO93i76pGYLDBM8s3OTGfizOY.Kes39J4JOISUmQqb YwKCAXBncPDX6IDv6dOiu_fXWy976hY0UujlImZCp4Q-- Received: from [99.92.108.41] by web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:50:49 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/574 YahooMailWebService/0.8.112.310352 References: Message-ID: <1312213849.88990.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:50:49 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] Two views of logic ? To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.237.219 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.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 No, not two views of logic, although there is no shortage of such views, even on this list. What this seems to be is a discussion of the relation between the semantics (truth values or a bit more) of the connectives and their ordinary language pragmatics (or maybe some special language pragmatics -- I'm unsure what the references to OOP amount to). It is not a news item that, even when it merely connects two things, claiming credence for both, that "and" also has other, pragmatic, functions. In particular, unlike the semantics, order is often important in the pragmatics: what come first is more important and what comes second less so, an afterthought (there are exceptions to this, of course, but they usually involve complicated scenarios, e.g. David getting the report of Uriah's death). Or the order may be temporal (which gives rise to another logical connective "and then" to build a whole logic on). Similarly, "or" and "if" may be used for bet-hedging, leaving an out just in case the first choice doesn't work out. (The derivation of these usages from the converstional conventions and the theory that has grown out of then is not simple, but still fairly straightforward, once you see it.) Now the Lojbanic significance of this is that we don't know much (if anything) about Lojban pragmatics. Can (is) the -e series used like the English "and"? Is -a(nai) used to hedge bets? We know that the pragmatic move from OR to XOR in English is represented in Lojban (though not consistently, apparently) by a change in connective (a move also used sometimes in Logic). Is the same true for other connectives? I'm not sure just where the difference of "but" from "and" lies (the pragmatics of English is no great shakes either); part of it is known syntactic but another part remains unpredictable from syntactic context -- and has not been formalized, that I know of. And so on. ----- Original Message ---- From: Escape Landsome To: lojban Sent: Sun, July 31, 2011 2:25:19 AM Subject: [lojban] Two views of logic ? Hello, there has been some discussion recently about the question of the meaning of AND (I used AND in a sense that was different from the pure logical AND, meaning something akin to OOP-multiple inheritance). Now, I'd like to draw your attention on something that bothers me : although this is not strictly a lojban-related question, it shares some relation with lojbanic interests. It is the fact that natlang AND is not exactly logical AND (this is not a new item), --- EVEN WHEN the "semantic import" of AND is a logical one (this is more of a new item). Let me make myself clearer with a natlang example : when I say, "John is ill, this may be because of X, OR SOMETHING ELSE", there is a logical import in this sentence, which is, roughly speaking, the logical conditions by which we can tell if this sentence is true or not... and there is also a semantic and a pragmatic import. I claim that here the logical and the semantic imports are distinct. Indeed, saying that somebody is ill "for some reason, or for some other else", is tautologic, as it is clear that (X or something else) maps everything in the world. Yet, semantically (and even pragmatically), saying "X or something else" is a good way of saying "anything, but more acutely X" (or, more probably). You may reply that, in this case, what is said is "anything, but more acutely X", which is not "anything", neither a "OR-expression". I agree with that. So, we need a semantic connector to say "A but more acutely B" ? Also, please note that "X.... or something else...." is justified in a "cognitive-time-elapsing event" of scanning all the possible causes of John's illness. The speaker begins by regarding X as a cause, then adds the modifier "or something else" as a second-order correction. Maybe, this very way of scanning things, as a first-order assertion corrected by a second-order one, should be kept. Maybe the connector "ko'a but more acutely ko'e" should render the mindflow logic of this second-order correction ? -- .esk -- 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.