Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/28/2002 4:35:12 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:

>And what does {ce'o}
>have to do with {ce} other than that they begin the same?

According to the Lojban lore I have absorbed, {ce'o} is just
like {ce} plus an ordering. I will be delighted to find out
I'm wrong. So sequences can carry logs?

I don't think so (in general anyhow).  What makes that a reaasonable question? I said that a sequence was neither a mass nor a set (carrying logs turning up frequently in discussion of masses). 

<<I Lojban... in general {n?} define to how ask even won?t>>Well, in arithmetic it is primitive, so can't be defined.  But {ny ce'o
>y'ybu} seems about right.  Specifying what it means would be harder.

I would have said plain {ny y'ybu} was much better. Why would
it be a sequence of two things, however one understands what
a sequence is?

But I was talking of specifying its meaning, yes, not of how to
represent it.

<<I Lojban... in general {n?} define to how ask even won?t>>Well, in arithmetic it is primitive, so can't be defined.  But {ny ce'o
>y'ybu} seems about right.  Specifying what it means would be harder.

I would have said plain {ny y'ybu} was much better. Why would
it be a sequence of two things, however one understands what
a sequence is?

But I was talking of specifying its meaning, yes, not of how to
represent it.


<<I Lojban... in general {n?} define to how ask even won?t>>Well, in arithmetic it is primitive, so can't be defined.  But {ny ce'o
>y'ybu} seems about right.  Specifying what it means would be harder.

I would have said plain {ny y'ybu} was much better. Why would
it be a sequence of two things, however one understands what
a sequence is?

But I was talking of specifying its meaning, yes, not of how to
represent it.>

Well, it is a sequence of two things, {n}, a variable and {'} function symbol.  I would take {ny y'ybu} to be merely a primed {n}, one way to create a new variable (I am a subscript man myself).
You said:
<I won't even ask how to define {n'} in general in Lojban...>
That reads (if you are using the braces as quotes for Lojban --or in this case some kind of MEX) as asking of a definition of the text inclosed, which I gave you (one of -- the other one, what would it be replaced by in the system is unanswerable, since the tick is primitive, as I said).