From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCn29nzBBoEeLkOtw@googlegroups.com Sun Sep 18 15:16:17 2011 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R5Pep-0003Ym-Dt; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:17 -0700 Received: by wwe5 with SMTP id 5sf11224755wwe.16 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:08 -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=JnEMUg7gM92BUfBSH8Y0AO3132AxhI6IVcMGXMrek6A=; b=POFF1z6xMjYbS0yEta2QhVHKKxIkH4mR81Acf/1pOAjDNI0L13OCddGiK8fddDMB04 FrX7IAhC6OTdY/h1waIZjL02XEEx5JdxyeQM9uWlfUp5uu079zVjztGB3VlRToYFC3u+ WI8uB+nF5eShqB48pA5rCycCinbeM3ChL1hzE= Received: by 10.216.230.94 with SMTP id i72mr666128weq.21.1316384167313; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:07 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.21.146 with SMTP id r18ls28669eer.0.canary; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.20.216 with SMTP id g24mr164400ebb.1.1316384165739; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.20.216 with SMTP id g24mr164399ebb.1.1316384165718; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f52.google.com (mail-fx0-f52.google.com [209.85.161.52]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m9si1199001faf.0.2011.09.18.15.16.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.52; Received: by fxe23 with SMTP id 23so6030828fxe.39 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.95.148 with SMTP id d20mr3865608fan.59.1316384165561; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.152.39.35 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:16:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110918213323.GB6878@gonzales> References: <20110912225255.GG28088@gonzales> <1315882379.97949.YahooMailRC@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20110914041335.GO28088@gonzales> <55EFAEEE-10A9-4002-951E-7BD949DC29F7@yahoo.com> <20110914232007.GC6492@gonzales> <1316055853.22283.YahooMailRC@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20110916000632.GD7274@gonzales> <20110918172927.GA4310@gonzales> <20110918213323.GB6878@gonzales> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:16:05 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable 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 209.85.161.52 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 On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Martin Bays wrote: > > Consider: > > A: xu do pu klama su'o friko gugde > B1: mi pu na klama [zo'e] > B2: mi pu klama [zo'e] > > To get the right readings without an intermediate C, and without using > kinds, we'd have to interpret the first as being the sum of all African > countries, and the second as being a particular country which witnesses > the existential. > > With an intermediate C, we can give both {zo'e}s the same > interpretation. But then what do you do with: C: xu do pu klama ro friko gugde D1: mi na pu klama [zo'e] D2: mi pu klama [zo'e] Assuming that we agree D1 should be the negation of C, and D2 its affirmation, you can't get that with a close scope existential. I'm happier with "zo'e" being "lo friko gugde" in all these cases. > Moreover, the Cless interpretation of B1 relied on the distributivity of > klama's x2. How, without using a C and without using kinds, could we > handle {lo nanmu na bevri lo ti jubme}, if it's intended to mean that no > group consisting of men carries the table? I think (smething like) kinds is the best way to go. > {zo'e} and {lo} are different, I think, as can be observed by their > behaviour under negation. My observation is that "zo'e" and "lo" behave just as "mi" and "ta" under negation. "lo nanmu na bevri lo vi jubme" is what I would say when I want to contrast it with "lo nanmu cu bevri lo va sfofa" or with "lo ninmu cu bevri lo vi jubme", or with "lo nanmu cu renro lo vi jubme", for example. > Can I get your opinion on the "Nirvana Conjecture"? > > I think that if we ignore anaphora, which could really be horribly > complicated, we should be in agreement that it should be true. Are we? > > *the Nirvana Conjecture: > > When interpreting lojban, other rules reduce to the problem of > > determining the truth value in a given possible world of a bridi > > whose sumti are all either elements of the universe or are {zo'e} > > expressions (or are anaphora to the latter, but let's ignore that). > > So reordering, we have selbri(c_1,...,c_n,zo'e_1,...,zo'e_m). I would agree, except I don't make any distinction between the c_'s and the zo'e_'s, so I just end up with: "When interpreting lojban, other rules reduce to the problem of determining the truth value in a given possible world of a bridi whose sumti are all elements of the universe." So your conjecture is true for me too, just a slightly misleading way of putting it. (Of course in some cases the reduction might not be actually doable, since it might involve an infinite number of bridi, say for "ro rarna namcu cu zmadu su'o rarna namcu".) 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.