[lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: About the negators

["Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
> On Sunday 21 December 2008 13:53:53 Jorge Llambías wrote:
>
>> A full specification of the rules would go something like this:
>>
>> We define an "atomic bridi" as a bridi that contains no bridi
>> negations, no (outer) quantifiers, and no (logical) connectives. It
>> corresponds to an atomic formula of pedicate logic.  (In an atomic
>> bridi, the order of arguments can be changed freely with SE and/or FA,
>> without changing meaning).
>
> It can contain bridi negations inside a sumti; these aren't affected by the
> transform, unless you apply it to the bridi inside the sumti. e.g. {lo na
> gerku cu batci mi}.

Yes, you are right, and the same goes for quantifiers and logical
connectives, say inside a nu abstraction, or inside a relative clause.
Those are not really handled at all by basic vanilla first-order
predicate logic. We are only concerned here with bridi negation,
(outer) quantifiers and (logical) connectives at the main bridi level.

>> The rules to transform a general bridi into
>> wfb form are as follows:
>>
>> Step 1: write all afterthought connectives in forethought form.
...

> In {su'oda na broda gi'e brode}, you have to convert {gi'e} to forethought
> before moving {na}, else it won't find a {ge} to stop it.

Correct, that's what the "Step 1" is for. (One can ignore Step 1 if
one is comfortable in determining the scope of afterthought
connectives, which is not always so obvious as in the forethought
form.)

> This transform also applies to non-logical connectives, although the result
> won't be a logical wfb. E.g.:
> ti na gucti li re joi pulgada li so

That's not grammatical. Do you mean "ti na gucti be li re joi pulgada be li so"?

> -> ti joigi na gucti li re gi pulgada li so
> -> ti joigi naku gucti li re gi pulgada li so

I would agree those two are equivalent, although who knows what they
mean. Non-logical connectives applied to sumti correspond to binary
functions in FOPL (except for "fa'u"), but non-logical connectives
applied to anything other than sumti are something of a mystery. I
don't think they are equivalent to anything in first order predicate
logic.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.