Re: [lojban] Meaning of multiple negations

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 6:55 PM, John E. Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ditto (the second part) for most scope issues, especially right hand ends.  The difficulties here are a major reason why attempts to translate back from Lojban to predicate logic either fail or are much more complicated than one would expect.

The rules to move from Lojban to predicate logic notation are actually
quite simple if you ignore the "full bridi scope" nonsense: You
convert afterthought connectives to forethought and then you just
start from left to right and move things to the prenex:

su'o da poi prenu cu ricfu gi'e na gleki
= su'o da poi prenu ge ricfu gi na gleki
= su'o da poi prenu zo'u da ge ricfu gi na gleki
= su'o da poi prenu zo'u ge da ricfu gi da na gleki
= su'o da poi prenu zo'u ge da ricfu gi naku zo'u da gleki
= Ex:R(x)^~G(x)

Notice that in the last step you could say that "na" has "full bridi
scope", but that's only after you have moved all preceding connectives
and quantifiers out of the way, not before.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.