[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] imperatives & scope (was: RE: Predicate logic and childhood.)



           
--part1_a2.13e88b13.28287c6a_boundary 
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="part1_a2.13e88b13.28287c6a_alt_boundary"

           
--part1_a2.13e88b13.28287c6a_alt_boundary 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/6/2001 8:32:14 AM Central Daylight Time, pycyn@aol.com 
writes:



> <
> 
> >> It does NOT mean (f): 
>> 
>>  f.  Make it the case that you make a note of my telephone number. 
>>  f'. Make it the case that you make a note of a telephone number of mine. 
>> 
>> -- for these would be satisfied if you wrote down any old number but then 
>> took steps to make sure that the phone company assigned this number to me.>
>>  
>> 
> 
> 
> Again, I would use prenex but I suspect that this is common enough that we 
> need a new convention here, as we have already in various other world 
> shiftings, about the referent of definite descriptions therein.  since that 
> problem is not completely worked out yet, ... >
> 

In this case however {leca} ought to be enough -- "my  current number"


           
--part1_a2.13e88b13.28287c6a_alt_boundary 
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 5/6/2001 8:32:14 AM Central Daylight Time, pycyn@aol.com 
<BR>writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&lt;
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">It does NOT mean (f): 
<BR>
<BR> f. &nbsp;Make it the case that you make a note of my telephone number. 
<BR> f'. Make it the case that you make a note of a telephone number of mine. 
<BR>
<BR>-- for these would be satisfied if you wrote down any old number but then 
<BR>took steps to make sure that the phone company assigned this number to me.&gt;
<BR> 
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Again, I would use prenex but I suspect that this is common enough that we 
<BR>need a new convention here, as we have already in various other world 
<BR>shiftings, about the referent of definite descriptions therein. &nbsp;since that 
<BR>problem is not completely worked out yet, ... &gt;
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>In this case however {leca} ought to be enough -- "my &nbsp;current number"
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT></HTML>
           
--part1_a2.13e88b13.28287c6a_alt_boundary----part1_a2.13e88b13.28287c6a_boundary 
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

           
 
Return-path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
From: Pycyn@aol.com
Full-name: Pycyn
Message-ID: <75.1453d2bb.28281db8@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 11:48:08 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] imperatives & scope (was: RE: Predicate logic and childhood.)
To: Pycyn@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type:  multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_a2.13e88b13.28281db8_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519

           
--part2_a2.13e88b13.28281db8_boundary 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/6/2001 8:32:14 AM Central Daylight Time, pycyn@aol.com 
writes:


> 
> >> It does NOT mean (f): 
>> 
>>   f.  Make it the case that you make a note of my telephone number. 
>>   f'. Make it the case that you make a note of a telephone number of mine. 
>> 
>> -- for these would be satisfied if you wrote down any old number but then 
>> took steps to make sure that the phone company assigned this number to me.>
>>  
>> 
> 
> Again, I would use prenex but I suspect that this is common enough that we 
> need a new convention here, as we have already in various other world 
> shiftings, about the referent of definite descriptions therein.  since that 
> problem is not completely worked out yet, ... 
> 
In this case however {leca} ought to be enough -- "my  current number"

           
--part2_a2.13e88b13.28281db8_boundary 
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 5/6/2001 8:32:14 AM Central Daylight Time, pycyn@aol.com 
<BR>writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">It does NOT mean (f): 
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;f. &nbsp;Make it the case that you make a note of my telephone number. 
<BR> &nbsp;f'. Make it the case that you make a note of a telephone number of mine. 
<BR>
<BR>-- for these would be satisfied if you wrote down any old number but then 
<BR>took steps to make sure that the phone company assigned this number to me.&gt;
<BR> 
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Again, I would use prenex but I suspect that this is common enough that we 
<BR>need a new convention here, as we have already in various other world 
<BR>shiftings, about the referent of definite descriptions therein. &nbsp;since that 
<BR>problem is not completely worked out yet, ... 
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>In this case however {leca} ought to be enough -- "my &nbsp;current number"
<BR></FONT></HTML>
           
--part2_a2.13e88b13.28281db8_boundary----part1_a2.13e88b13.28287c6a_boundary--