From lojban+bncCAAQ_fiX8gQaBETftbE@googlegroups.com Fri Aug 12 21:24:42 2011 Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Qs5m3-0002ZJ-Hg; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:24:42 -0700 Received: by yxk8 with SMTP id 8sf5526308yxk.16 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:24:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:x-pgp-key :x-pgp-keyid:x-cunselcu'a-valsi:user-agent: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; bh=3xoN3u0hvMgd+SByYhoMZL0z9yImUxJZ/qTunEPbDTI=; b=5VbRmDM/2ZxCbUpFadc3KaPGHaWkabKlrEbL52eyfQtUzzwAt01OPbkvWvYsE16Cao fdsdB45c5ebSzsj3vAip+4l1hncyOlrJDZH1Ixq/cJpNJhGXu/7ha1cGg9QrSEyJjT00 qhQ6tPfNxF7l9kISr/R9s3rWD1Vh8cifCELzE= Received: by 10.236.156.231 with SMTP id m67mr592370yhk.1.1313209469173; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:24:29 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.90.250.3 with SMTP id x3ls13394539agh.2.gmail; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:24:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.236.185.135 with SMTP id u7mr4301724yhm.6.1313209468164; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:24:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.109.2 with SMTP id h2msybc; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.171.71 with SMTP id i7mr1069803icz.24.1313162958518; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.171.71 with SMTP id i7mr1069802icz.24.1313162958500; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org [192.94.73.19]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v9si6086042pbc.2.2011.08.12.08.29.18 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of mbays@sdf.org designates 192.94.73.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=192.94.73.19; Received: from gonzales.homelinux.org (root@sverige.freeshell.org [192.94.73.4]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7CFTHGT016184 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:29:18 GMT Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from ) id 1Qrtfh-00023w-8w for lojban@googlegroups.com; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:29:17 +0200 Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:29:17 +0200 From: Martin Bays To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] xorlo and masses Message-ID: <20110812152917.GK10697@gonzales> References: <20110811101134.GF10697@gonzales> <1313159555.91794.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="YQEH9CATo+4lan7A" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1313159555.91794.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6 X-cunselcu'a-valsi: rutni User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Original-Sender: mbays@sdf.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of mbays@sdf.org designates 192.94.73.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mbays@sdf.org 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: , --YQEH9CATo+4lan7A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Friday, 2011-08-12 at 07:32 -0700 - John E Clifford : > First of all. get rid of the word "mass"; it has been used -- and > misused -- for too many things in Logjam history to be useful now. Fine. I'll just use 'gunma', and hope that isn't controversial too. > Now, then, a brief summary of xorlo: 'lo broda' refers to some broda > (contextually specified) or, equivalently, to a whole composed of > those some broda (a Lesniewskian set -- very different from the usual > sets). The expression gives no indication whether these broda are > acting individually or collectively with respect to their > predicate(s), hence the propriety of conjoining an apparently > collective use with an apparently distributive one. To be explicitly > collective, one must say 'loi broda'; to be explicitly distributive > say either 'PA lo broda' or 'lu'a lo broda'. The referents of all > these expressions are the same: some brodas or a whole consisting of > those some brodas. They differ only in how these broda (or this > whole) relates to its predicate(s). So in all cases, the referents of {lo/loi broda} are entities which individually broda? This appears to be in contradiction with the BPFK section definition of loi: loi [PA] broda - lo gunma be lo [PA] broda (under the interpretation I understand you as giving, the individual referents of the left hand side would generally not gunma, while those of the right hand side must) Or am I misinterpreting something? > ( 'lo'i broda' refers always to a set of broda and so interacts only > in a set like way -- with not particular connection to what its > members happen to be.) This theory harmonizes most of what CLL and its > addenda say about 'lo' and masses and a few other terms; what is left > out is best considered not to apply any more. This harmony remains tantalisingly out of earshot. Martin > ----- Original Message ----. =20 > From: Martin Bays > To: lojban@googlegroups.com > Sent: Thu, August 11, 2011 5:11:34 AM > Subject: [lojban] xorlo and masses >=20 > That is, I know, the kind of subject line to make those who lived > through the gadri wars shudder. >=20 > But my question is simple and hopefully simply resolved. >=20 > >From the gadri BPFK section: >=20 > """ > An individual can be anything, including a group, a set, a > substance, a number, etc. {lo broda} can refer to one or > more individuals. {lo'i broda} can refer only to those > individuals that are sets. {loi broda} can refer only to > those individuals that are groups ('masses'). > """ >=20 > >From the Indirect Referers section >=20 > """ > lu'a (LAhE) > Individual. (Member.) 1. It converts a sumti into > another sumti. The converted sumti points to the > referents of the unconverted sumti, removing any > indication of collectivization if there was any. > """ >=20 >=20 > These seem to indicate conflicting semantics for handling of masses. >=20 > (I'll use 'mass' in the CLL sense, intended to be synonymous with > 'gunma'/'group'/'collective'/'plurality') >=20 > The first appears to indicate that masses are still first-class > entities, such that e.g. in {lo tadni cu sruri le dinju}, the referents > of {lo tadni} are masses of students, not individual students. In > particular, it is reasonable for that {lo tadni} to have just one > referent. >=20 > The second appears to indicate that sumti can sometimes be 'flagged' as > being interpreted collectively - the referents are the same whether it > is so flagged or not, but if it is so flagged then a bridi involving it > is understood to hold of the mass consisting of the referents, rather > than distributively of the referents themselves. >=20 > Admittedly, these two interpretations are not literally inconsistent - you > *could* have first-class masses *and* mass-flagging, it would just be > very confusing. Is this really what was intended? >=20 > Things are confused even furtherly by the example given on the gadri > page of: >=20 > lo tadni cu sruri le dinju gi'e krixa > Students are surrounding the building and yelling. >=20 > , which seems (in the context of the use of this kind of example in the > lingustics literature) to suggest that the referents of {lo tadni} are > acting as a mass in the first bridi and distributively in the second. > Which would need the distributivity flag to have third value of > "ambiguous", or something like that... >=20 >=20 > Personally, I think the first interpretation (first-class masses which > gadri can return) fits best with the rest of lojban - although it leaves > open the question of how to specify that you *don't* want masses as the > referents when using gadri... {ro lo tadni} is no good, as it could be > interpreted as quantifying over some (perhaps just 1) masses which are > the referents of {lo tadni}. {lo tadni poi na gunma su'o tadni} is the > best I can come up with. >=20 > Hoping for clarification, >=20 > Martin >=20 > --=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@googlegr= oups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb= an?hl=3Den. --YQEH9CATo+4lan7A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk5FRs0ACgkQULC7OLX7LNYyLgCggj94gSMZ5DvdfOCHWZlJi0f9 2ucAn0qRVgbR2+gGIrFfAe7KMT5I512w =YTGY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --YQEH9CATo+4lan7A--