Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <lojban-beginners+bncCIycn8S8DhCM75_vBBoEiK1AJA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1QSEqa-0000Ax-JS; Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:50:30 -0700
Received: by vws2 with SMTP id 2sf745039vws.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
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:x-google-group-id:list-post
         :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=zo+lT+NZczuL5tO15y2ymMxvwShHYQZcx6JChV55Ffg=;
        b=D8QbWQ3mmvwvQIe+3jmlxOmfhW5HqqHNRmpwbKDZv2pdlMdKOGA8JUQi4GD84JrTIF
         dR5iYbuOVc+EB2uOQSp2AlVDz0j30cGNckVaYBebgo7aFcIKidnYY7MA5i2WKMHkZg+E
         shM8zmLj2ntpyPpX/vvYKNcElN+QqLUNEyo4Q=
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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        b=lyEYTxuqHWQv7883YJLVlGlR5K+yjVwHt/dpcwCTgmwDW8ct28i0pCYdeVszuj9ka7
         IXkfocb6DdeclRuQ3cXlhCffG+sd1/Ictv32JOm3LAbnkUyccXt7XfP47oG5znPmTsXY
         JsTDYrqV1UguzzusIc8GS2qJR+BmKYmruoQhk=
Received: by 10.220.189.136 with SMTP id de8mr173049vcb.0.1307047820403;
        Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.52.76.10 with SMTP id g10ls815015vdw.3.gmail; Thu, 02 Jun 2011
 13:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.180.10 with SMTP id dk10mr393052vdc.16.1307047819543;
        Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.180.10 with SMTP id dk10mr393051vdc.16.1307047819533;
        Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dz6si784715vdb.3.2011.06.02.13.50.19
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.172 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.172;
Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so2744482qyk.10
        for <lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>; Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.10.82 with SMTP id o18mr959082qco.79.1307047819016; Thu,
 02 Jun 2011 13:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.34.83 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:50:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikePfGbFMU=XmzPvOH3OE76ZO1bOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinZ=6+ZfhAR7aH5apBLx6obo7zYPg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimvJMNqtNG+Qn-0hmgTatctN1Eyng@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinLS5QidFFJuMC566Jb6y=uYYsf4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimEN0Ymvb_hmRW22x+c_J93wdWF2g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikQevE33+YCwjfSqiRW9Abzw6X8WQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinOXJaaZahOyDCiCwNQMuAWuXUerw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikkMyW7BaCjLNK2hxuE-xUJSBuZZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimF10Prdx7wvvL4jPZbV8Utp93Tkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=tzEjuDEM_WS3Zg173xd=ZmHqy2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikePfGbFMU=XmzPvOH3OE76ZO1bOw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 16:50:18 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTikYw2-y=57jXRhrsWVFuxEd_KyuTw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Just to double check, about {da} and quantifiers
From: Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: mturniansky@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.172 as permitted
 sender) smtp.mail=mturniansky@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: <lojban-beginners.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 300742228892
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban-beginners+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:lojban-beginners+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 4269

2011/6/1 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Michael Turniansky
> <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2011/5/31 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Who said anything about making "ro da poi broda" =3D "no da poi broda"?
>>
>> =A0Let me rephrase. =A0When you said, " If there are no cat-dogs, it's [
>> "ro da poi =A0ke'a gerku je mlatu cu broda"] true, since for every value
>> of da it will be false that da gerku je mlatu.", that means that there
>> are no cat-dogs.
>
> Right.
>
>>=A0 In a universe where "ro da poi gerku je mlatu" is a
>> nomei,
>
> There's no such universe. "ro da poi gerku je mlatu" is a quantifier,
> so it cannot be a nomei, whatever a nomei is (I think nothing is in
> fact a nomei, by definition, but a quantifier is certainly not a
> nomei).

  No, "ro da..." is not a quantifier. "ro" is a quantifier. "ro da..."
is each of the members of set (qualified by the whatever follows the
poi)

>
>> "no da poi gerku je mlatu" refers to the same thing (an empty
>> set).
>
> No, quantifiers don't refer, they quantify,
>
> In a universe where there are no cat-dogs, both "ro da poi gerku je
> mlatu cu smacu" and "no da poi gerku je mlatu cu smacu" happen to be
> true. Is that what you are saying? But neither of those expressions
> includes a reference.
>>=A0But my major point was simply =A0that =A0all things that are
>> cat-dogs are in fact a nomei.
>
> First you would have to explain how anything at all can be a nomei. My
> understanding is that "ro da zo'u da su'o mei", "For every x, x is
> something". =A0No thing is a nomei.

  Unless there are in fact, no things.

>> So for any broda, " ro da poi ke'a
>> gerku je mlatu ku'o va'o lo du'u da nomei cu broda" is true.
>
> You are now leaving logical simplicity behind by introducing this
> "va'o lo du'u da nomei" term.

  That was the condition that you imposed -- "If there are no catdogs"
 If there are no catdogs, then ro da is a mass composed of an empty
set, otherwise known as a nomei.


> If we try to expand your sentence to
> logical form, we get:
>
> ro da zo'u ganai da gerku je mlatu gi da va'o lo nu da nomei cu broda

  Stop.  Where did you get license to expand it like that?

>
> Now, for each value of "da", "da gerku je mlatu" is false, and "da
> nomei" is also false.
>
> So ganai ... gi ... is true because the first part is false. What did
> the never satisfied "va'o lo du'u da nomei" term add?
>
>> Which I
>> contend is precisely what "[ro] lo no gerku je mlatu cu broda" means
>> and is therefore always true. =A0I know, I know. You all disagree that
>> it's meaningful. But then you come around and assert what I consider
>> to be the very same thing, just phrased differently.
>
> I don't think we are saying the same thing at all. I assume you are
> not saying that "ro lo PA gerku je mlatu cu broda" expands to "ro da
> poi ke'a gerku je mlatu ku'o va'o lo du'u da PAmei cu broda", but I
> don't really know what it is you are saying it expands to.

  "ro lo PA broda cu brode" expands into  "ge ro lo broda cu brode gi
lo broda cu PAmei", I believe.  The only reason for the existence of
the va'o clause in the particular case we were working with was
because you were stating that there are no catdogs.  I was just making
that clear that is was  a given.  Because if you don't state it, how
do you know? (My answer is, of course, with an inner quantifier of no,
but the va'o works as well).

                 --gejyspa


>
> 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+unsubscrib=
e@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb=
an-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.