Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PsPkx-0006sF-33; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:38 -0800 Received: by pzk26 with SMTP id 26sf4442pzk.16 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature: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:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=NfGXojNYdZRgnjkmEFOXNy5N5i1y94cEstGGkooywkE=; b=mJH6QUMGJDLD9wH75wk53w6Hf4atYTPF8BRjj1Qne+c4BU1xXXnDOf/qGNxVXKCIHO yzog+H6KPVOifJNA/OzwepDbocZqesvcWHQgjAPF+kqWqtuckHRpncFlaBAjBgFkLP5f 7k/1cW4D/5tsjRtvduWWra0I7SYbDLsG83/w0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; 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:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=5/j7BXKHA0iOeB4fonYULGtniLENqBV/SjrkeAzJdj7xk3At72g1o1S9Ov6fPgu344 4raiOY++UEwqCvtP5rdDLO83p6SuUjCB9/YZky14pLzvlhFm4EYEZE6kaAVXjqthM7vF dEwVMqE8cQ29BIprdRTiHm2BEZUUARSwY09f4= Received: by 10.142.155.9 with SMTP id c9mr23041wfe.8.1298509941192; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:21 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.97.18 with SMTP id u18ls1186644wfb.2.p; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.211.21 with SMTP id j21mr25999wfg.2.1298509939934; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.211.21 with SMTP id j21mr25997wfg.2.1298509939886; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pv0-f170.google.com (mail-pv0-f170.google.com [74.125.83.170]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k41si8401449wfa.3.2011.02.23.17.12.19 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:19 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.83.170; Received: by pvg16 with SMTP id 16so6698pvg.29 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.144.14 with SMTP id r14mr136529wfd.429.1298509939505; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.53.5 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:12:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201102171403.40004.phma@phma.optus.nu> <201102171622.02738.phma@phma.optus.nu> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 20:12:19 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Question about {roda} From: Ian Johnson To: lojban-beginners@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 74.125.83.170 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=blindbravado@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd3291eae7b29049cfce752 Content-Length: 7709 --000e0cd3291eae7b29049cfce752 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think throwing up our hands by not using {le} when vagueness *is intended *is much worse than just using {le}. At least vagueness is somewhat explici= t with {le}. mu'o mi'e .latros. 2011/2/23 Jorge Llamb=EDas > 2011/2/22 Michael Turniansky : > > > > I don't understand what is so onerous about simply SAYING "ro le pren= u" > if > > that's what you mean. > > We were comparing "ro da" vs "ro prenu", and my point was that the > restriction to prenu was in many contexts insignificant compared to > other contextual restrictions, so "ro prenu" doesn't solve the > putative problems with "ro da". English forces you to distinguish > "everybody" from "everything" in the same way that it forces you to > distinguish "he" and "she" from "it", Lojban doesn't. > > As for "le", I don't really know how it really works. Suppose you want > to say "Everybody will love your dress at the party tomorrow", but I > have no idea who will be there at the party tomorrow. Can I use "le > prenu" to refer to the people who will be at the party, even though I > don't have any particular person in mind? Is "le" about particular > values you have in mind or about particular restrictions you have in > mind? I don't know. I don't think "le" is well defined, so I don't use > it. > > > You are arbitrarily restricting it to mean exaclty > > whatever it is you think it should be retricted, and explicitly saying > so. > > So instead of the listener having to ponder, "Oh, I wonder if the speak= er > is > > really intended to mean everything, or if he is intending to restrict i= t > to > > some context, and if the latter, what context is it?" He already KNOWS > the > > answer to the first part (restricted), and simply has to figure out the > > second part. Whereas if you say "ro prenu" you mean exactly that -- "al= l > > people, everywhere" No further pondering necessary. > > "All people, everywhere" could be more restricted than plain "all > people", because it excludes people that are nowhere. It may also make > you wonder whether you also mean people of every time or whether you > mean to restrict it to the present, since you went to the trouble of > specifying where but not when. I don't think "ro prenu" makes any > reference to places, so it can't mean exactly "all people, > everywhere". > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den. > > --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den. --000e0cd3291eae7b29049cfce752 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think throwing up our hands by not using {le} when vagueness is intend= ed is much worse than just using {le}. At least vagueness is somewhat e= xplicit with {le}.

mu'o mi'e .latros.

2011/2/23 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
2011/2/22 Michael Turniansky <m= turniansky@gmail.com>:
>
> =A0 I don't understand what is so onerous about simply SAYING &quo= t;ro le prenu" if
> that's what you mean.

We were comparing "ro da" vs "ro prenu", and my p= oint was that the
restriction to prenu was in many contexts insignificant compared to
other contextual restrictions, so "ro prenu" doesn't solve th= e
putative problems with "ro da". English forces you to distinguish=
"everybody" from "everything" in the same way that it f= orces you to
distinguish "he" and "she" from "it", Lojban = doesn't.

As for "le", I don't really know how it really works. Suppose= you want
to say "Everybody will love your dress at the party tomorrow", bu= t I
have no idea who will be there at the party tomorrow. Can I use "le prenu" to refer to the people who will be at the party, even though I<= br> don't have any particular person in mind? Is "le" about parti= cular
values you have in mind or about particular restrictions you have in
mind? I don't know. I don't think "le" is well defined, s= o I don't use
it.

> You are arbitrarily restricting it to mean exaclty
> whatever it is you think it should be retricted, and explicitly saying= so.
> So instead of the listener having to ponder, "Oh, I wonder if the= speaker is
> really intended to mean everything, or if he is intending to restrict = it to
> some context, and if the latter, what context is it?"=A0 He alrea= dy KNOWS the
> answer to the first part (restricted), and simply has to figure out th= e
> second part.=A0Whereas if you say "ro prenu" you mean exactl= y that -- "all
> people, everywhere"=A0 No further pondering necessary.

"All people, everywhere" could be more restricted than plai= n "all
people", because it excludes people that are nowhere. It may also make=
you wonder whether you also mean people of every time or whether you
mean to restrict it to the present, since you went to the trouble of
specifying where but not when. I don't think "ro prenu" makes= any
reference to places, so it can't mean exactly "all people,
everywhere".

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
You received this message because y= ou are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.<= br> To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegr= oups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
--000e0cd3291eae7b29049cfce752--