Re: PROPOSAL: Lambda Notation For Dummies (and & Rosta) & Lojban

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

mi pu cusku di'e

> > This proposal involves creating an explicit "lambda quantifier", which would
> > formally belong to selma'o PA but would be attached only to da-series KOhA
> > or BY cmavo.

la xorxes. cusku di'e

> Any reason why this is preferred to a simple KOhA?

Well, one point is that "a simple KOhA" could only be a singleton.  If
we want to have properties or mekso with two lambda variables, we'd have
to subscript them, which is unmathematical: it's \lambda(x), not \lambda.

> Also, it would be nice if we could just use {ke'a} for it. Its function is
> very similar, and the problems that might arise in rare cases of embedding
> arise already anyway as it is, so in theory subscripts have to be used.

I'll consider this one.  "ke'a" is pretty narrowly defined,
and I don't know that I favor extending it.

--
John Cowan              sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
                e'osai ko sarji la lojban.