Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

[And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>]

John:
#>>> John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> 02/19/02 12:00am >>>
#Jorge Llambias scripsit:
#> xod: x1 is a name and x4 is the function
#> cowan: x1 is the function and x4 is an expression (a text)
#> lojbab: x1 is the function and x4 is something like li f(x)=x*2,
#>         which is not very clear what it is because equations
#>         are not numbers.
#> pc: x1=x4 both are the function, with the proviso that good style
#>     requires to use a more helpful description in x4.
#> 
#> I much prefer pc's version over any of the others, although even
#> better for me would be to drop x4 altoghether.
#
#I don't see how that can work.  Given that x1 is a function (rejecting
#xod's view), an abstract object, you need some x4 to tell you which
#function it is.  A function is not just any mapping between the
#elements of the domain and the range, it is some particular mapping.
#such as "successor", "ancestor", "solely owned by", or what have you.
#
#Consider the set of clock numbers: {12, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11}.
#Use this as the domain and range of two functions: "an hour later than"
#and "an hour earlier than".  Without an x4, you can't tell which is
#which.

I see the argument. I don't think it's right. The relationship between
"the function" and "an hour later than" is an appositive/equative one,
as Jorge & pc have been saying. Likewise we don't add an extra sumti to "prenu" to specify the name of the person -- "le prenu" tells you it's a 
person, but not which person; "le fancu" would tell you it's a function, but 
not which function. So, to solve your problem, po'u should be used,
not this spurious x4.

--And.