Re: [lojban-beginners] Question about {roda}

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Sunday 20 February 2011 03:57:31 Remo Dentato wrote:
>   The easiest, quick&dirty solution that come to my mind is to mandate that
> an unboud {di} is NOT context dependent while {da} and {de} might be
> context dependent. The "EVERYTHING" in logic sense   $\forall x :
> isapple(x)$ would be {rodi plise}. I don't particularly like it, but it
> seems rather harmless to me.

"da", "de", and "di" all mean the same except that they're different 
variables. If you want to be context dependent, you can say "ro zo'e".

>  I mean that the case when "all" is bound from the context is much more
> common than the case where it means "EVERYTHING".
>  Note how we have to use the uppercase trick to specify we do not mean the
> usual "everything" but a specific "everything" whose meaning, by the way,
> is specified by the context of the discussion we are having.

I think that your "is specified by the context of the discussion" means the 
same as my "universe of discourse". For example, if Matthew 14:20 said "ro da 
citka gi'e tolxagjybi'o", I would understand that the people, the bread, the 
fish, the boat, the sea, and maybe even John the Baptist's head all ate and 
were satisfied, but not the earth's core or the star Sirius. Is that what you 
meant?

Pierre
-- 
lo ponse be lo mruli po'o cu ga'ezga roda lo ka dinko

-- 
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=en.