Re: Problems with Abstraction

[John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>]

la .and. cusku di'e

> Definitely. I hear it quite often & it causes a double-take.

Wow.
 
> Indeed, I'm surprised that you're surprised: I thought that
> it was the widespread existence of "All that flows is not
> water" speakers, filtered via Horn's book, that was in large
> part responsible for the analogous Lojban rule.

It may be so.  What I know of Horn's book is filtered through
the negation chapter, which is mostly lojbab's.  I've never
read the book itself.

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@ccil.org
			e'osai ko sarji la lojban

From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Wed Nov 12 11:46:23 1997
        for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Wed, 12 Nov 1997 11:46:13 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199711121646.LAA08601@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: John Cowan <cowan@DRV.CBC.COM>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: John Cowan <cowan@DRV.CBC.COM>
Organization: Lojban Peripheral
Subject:      Re: le/lo
X-To:         Lojban List <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 662

la .and. cusku di'e

> > There's no problem either with:
> >
> >                             mi denpa tu'a lo plejykarce
> >                             "I'm waiting for something about a taxi."
> >
> > because the quantification is within the abstraction:
>
> Was that actually established? I don't remember that.

There is no doubt that (absent a prenex) quantification is local
to the nearest enclosing bridi.  Presumably a "tu'a", which implies
an internal bridi (tu'a zo'e = tu'a le su'u co'e) has the same
rule.

--
John Cowan      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@ccil.org
                        e'osai ko sarji la lojban