[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Re: Usage of lo and le
On 5/10/06, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/10/06, Maxim Katcharov <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, I see no difference. If you make this inner "all" open to
> interpretation,
It is not "all" that is open to interpretation, it is "bear" (or whatever
the predicate). The set of things that satisfy a given predicate
relevantly depends on the context of the utterance.
So you're talking about verificity? I thought that we had put this aside.
> then you have no way to be absolutely specific
> regarding meaning "all ever", or ("all bears ever who are climbers of
> this *pats a tree* ever, within 5 minutes backwards and forwards of
> right... now.")
Yes, you can do it in the same or a similar way as you are doing it
in English here, by adding more clarifying words. The {sai} or {cai}
I proposed plays a similar role to the "ever" in the English "all ever".
It is usually not necessary, but it can help you convey a difference.
{sai} or {cai} aren't a solution, they're a hack that ... well, for
the purposes of this discussion, make it hard for me to give you a
sensible example. But one still exists that completery breaks the two:
we have two favorite cubs, out of a litter of 5, in a
group-owned-by-us of 10, and they're all playing with some other cubs,
in a large group. And I suddenly start talking to you about "all
bears" (however wrong I may be). For all you know, I may be talking
about the two cubs (your {ro}), the litter (uh, {ro sai}), our bears
(...{ro cai}?), the bears in the forest that surround us, the bears in
the country that we're in, whatever. Point being, there could me more
than 3 contexts that are a lot more sensible than "all bears". I mean,
given the nature of talking about all bears, there's /usually/ more
than 3 contexts that are more applicable than it. But I want to talk
about all bears. I'm trying to start a philosophical discussion or
whatever.