[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Problems with Abstraction
- To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
- Subject: Re: Problems with Abstraction
- From: "Lee Daniel Crocker (none)" <lcrocker@MERCURY.COLOSSUS.NET>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:21:05 -0500 (EST)
- In-reply-to: <199710151939.MAA16238@red.colossus.net> from "Logical Language Group" at Oct 15, 97 03:09:16 pm
- Organization: Piclab (http://www.piclab.com/)
- Reply-to: Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com>
- Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
> The short answer on your abstraction comments is to look up the discussion
> of ce'u (lambda) in chap 16 of the refgrammar. In general, ka and ni are
> indeed supposed to be working on the whole bridi. If talking about the
> relationship between one place and the rest of the places, then you use
> ce'u in that one place. At least this is what I THINK ce'u does %^).
The refgram makes sense and is reasonably clear on this point, but I
do see {ka} and {ni} used (by myself, too) as if there were a semi-
implied {ce'u} or {makau} in the first omitted place.
--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC