From lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhCeutrzBBoE2oZv9Q@googlegroups.com Sun Sep 18 18:38:48 2011 Received: from mail-pz0-f57.google.com ([209.85.210.57]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R5Soo-0000AB-0Q; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:38:48 -0700 Received: by pzd13 with SMTP id 13sf3069658pzd.12 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:38:40 -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=HtrTBk0WZQlD7iKpTXXvc8p7HMg33ijCnNkLzNgwfng=; b=z8gdVxR7ac9WT+6C8KrkOjffpVuLNapLvRuqnpaMBwIPRxViKVVkcLW8gm40teoRcI htdlOQM9+YYQtaRLP1Xjfi5UXvTYsl9kNSfvH+vuELuo0vVZ9ipor4qi1Xt8S6ABW2cB TkVf9fsqZQbaXCkv012v+YEB3+eaoHwPHoFks= Received: by 10.68.209.74 with SMTP id mk10mr125011pbc.73.1316396318164; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:38:38 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.33.194 with SMTP id t2ls18776996pbi.0.gmail; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:38:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.66.161 with SMTP id g1mr1505083pbt.10.1316396214570; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.66.161 with SMTP id g1mr1505081pbt.10.1316396214553; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id kr11si23916874pbb.1.2011.09.18.18.36.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:36:54 -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 p8J1arIq015086 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 01:36:54 GMT Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from ) id 1R5Smz-0003BJ-MK for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:36:53 -0400 Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:36:53 -0400 From: Martin Bays To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable Message-ID: <20110919013653.GC6878@gonzales> References: <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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2Z2K0IlrPCVsbNpk" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6 X-cunselcu'a-valsi: ponse 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: , --2Z2K0IlrPCVsbNpk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Sunday, 2011-09-18 at 19:16 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas : > 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. >=20 > But then what do you do with: >=20 > C: xu do pu klama ro friko gugde > D1: mi na pu klama [zo'e] > D2: mi pu klama [zo'e] >=20 > 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. Sure you can - in both cases, C would be the singleton with element the sum of all African countries. That depends on the distributivity of klama, which is something I just complained about... so perhaps the exchange you should be challenging me with is C': xu ro lo nanmu cu bevri ko'a D1': [zo'e] na bevri ko'a D2': [zo'e] bevri ko'a In this case, I don't see any way for either of {zo'e}s to be interpreted in a way which explicitly repeats C' or its negation. I'd prefer to say that that's just how zo'e is, if the alternative is allowing it to introduce a universal quantifier. > I'm happier with "zo'e" being "lo friko gugde" in all these cases. Do you mean by this the Kind? Kinds were intended, at least when talking to you, to be allowed as elements of C - so that's covered. > > 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? >=20 > I think (smething like) kinds is the best way to go. We can use kinds, but we lose a lot of information when we do so. > > {zo'e} and {lo} are different, I think, as can be observed by their > > behaviour under negation. >=20 > 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. Would you accept that "Lions are ruining my garden" is a reasonable possible translation of {lo cinfo cu ca daspo lo mi purdi}? Would you agree with Chierchia (Ch98 p.364) that "Lions are ruining my garden" means that there exist some lions which are ruining my garden? If so - that's the kind of existential quantification which we don't see with {mi} or {ti}. {lo cinfo cu ca na daspa lo mi purdi} has to have as as a meaning that no lions are destroying my garden. Could it be that our only point of disagreement here is that you'd prefer to leave {lo cinfo} as a Kind, and have a later stage of processing do the conversion to (in this case) an existential, while I'm suggesting we skip the Kind stage? Actually that can't quite be the only point of disagreement, as I'd want an existential or generic reading of {lo} to be allowed in cases when there's also a pure-Kind reading - e.g. "I don't like lions" vs "I don't like some lions" vs "I don't like generic lions", all meaning quite different things; if {lo cinfo} in {mi na nelci lo cinfo} returned a Kind, it seems we'd have no way of accessing the latter two meanings, since the first would take priority. Let me make that a question: do you consider "there are some lions such that I don't like them" to be an interpretation of {mi na nelci lo cinfo}? If so, how do you obtain it? > > 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? >=20 > > > *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). >=20 > 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. Cool. > (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".) Natch. Actually doable in finite models, though. Martin --2Z2K0IlrPCVsbNpk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk52nLUACgkQULC7OLX7LNYbzwCg3IUBEwsCXyCm1Et5OfDzIWwT BAkAn1rZzO8Tm0LsCZT3D49j6KhTrG1S =cVv6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2Z2K0IlrPCVsbNpk--