Re: TECH: existential quantification

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

la .i,n. cusku di'e

> I pretty much agree with Jorge on this, but I'd like to repeat a
> suggestion I've made in the past.  I like {za'i} in this situation.
>
>         mi troci lo za'i mi viska do
>
> This assumes that {za'i <broda>} (the state <broda>) is some
> sort of abstraction from all the events {nu <broda>}.

I think this statement evinces a confusion between "nu" and "mu'e", between
events and point-events.  In Lojban, a state is a kind of event.  You may
say that a state is made up of a welding-together of many point-events,
provided you quantize time (and we don't have to), but nothing can be done
with states that can't be done with (generalized, {nu}) events.

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