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

[rdentato@gmail.com]

On Feb 21, 2011 8:14pm, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> My only concern is that if {roda} has an implicite {poi co'e} then I'm not sure what you could put in for that {co'e} that gets you back to the strong EVERYTHING that logicians want.
> 
> lojban makes it very easy to narrow a concepts meaning (with tanru, with poi/noi, with further bridi, etc...), but there are very few ways (none that my fever-addled brain can think of at the moment anyway) that expand a concepts meaning.  So if we take something as widely expanded as {ro} and say "oh, but it's not really universal all the time" then what CAN you say that is consistently universal?

I (sort of) understand your point, Luke. Only, I can't imagine a situation when you need to be "universal" and that fact is not obvious by the context.

Could you give an example where {roda broda} can be impacted by the fact that one may implicitly restrict the {da} binding?

remo

-- 
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.