* Saturday, 2011-08-13 at 06:30 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>:
> Wrong, but not controversial. How the parts of lo broda broda is not an issue.
> Consider, lo sruri be le dinju. Its individual parts do not sruri le dinju
> individually, only some more numerous whole within the bigger whole does (or
> maybe only the whole whole). The collective/distributive distinction is
> manifest only in how 'lo etc. broda' is used, not in how its referent is
> constituted,
So you mean that the strongest tautology is not {ro lo broda cu broda},
but simply {lo broda cu broda}?
So for example, {lo besna} is ambiguous between having brains as
referents and having (e.g.) nerves as referents?
Worse, if you adopt the axiom that a whole satisfies a property if any
subwhole does, the referents could also include rhinoceroses.
So with this meaning of {lo}, how would you unambiguously translate
"These brains are conscious", without the possibility of being
misunderstood as claiming that their component nerves are, nor electric
razors?
I can only see {ro lo ti besna poi ro ke'a besna cu sanji}.
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Sat, August 13, 2011 3:29:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [lojban] xorlo and masses
>
> * Friday, 2011-08-12 at 23:04 -0600 - Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com>:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> >
> > > * Friday, 2011-08-12 at 07:32 -0700 - John E Clifford <
> > > kali9putra@yahoo.com>:
> > >
> > > > Now, then, a brief summary of xorlo: 'lo broda' refers to some broda
> > > > (contextually specified) or, equivalently, to a whole composed of
> > > > those some broda (a Lesniewskian set -- very different from the usual
> > > > sets). The expression gives no indication whether these broda are
> > > > acting individually or collectively with respect to their
> > > > predicate(s), hence the propriety of conjoining an apparently
> > > > collective use with an apparently distributive one. To be explicitly
> > > > collective, one must say 'loi broda'; to be explicitly distributive
> > > > say either 'PA lo broda' or 'lu'a lo broda'. The referents of all
> > > > these expressions are the same: some brodas or a whole consisting of
> > > > those some brodas. They differ only in how these broda (or this
> > > > whole) relates to its predicate(s).
> > >
> > > So in all cases, the referents of {lo/loi broda} are entities which
> > > individually broda?
> >
> > No, just loi. lo is completely non specific.
>
> I'm not sure what "non specific" means, but... all I'm claiming is that
> {ro lo broda cu broda} is a tautology, where {ro lo broda} quantifies
> distributively over the referents of {lo broda}. Is this controversial?
>
> > > This appears to be in contradiction with the BPFK section definition of
> > > loi:
> > >
> > > loi [PA] broda - lo gunma be lo [PA] broda
> > >
> > > (under the interpretation I understand you as giving, the individual
> > > referents of the left hand side would generally not gunma, while those
> > > of the right hand side must)
> > >
> > > Or am I misinterpreting something?
> > >
> > > > ----- Original Message ----.
> > > > From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
> > > > To: lojban@googlegroups.com
> > > > Sent: Thu, August 11, 2011 5:11:34 AM
> > > > Subject: [lojban] xorlo and masses
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > These seem to indicate conflicting semantics for handling of masses.
> > > >
> > > > (I'll use 'mass' in the CLL sense, intended to be synonymous with
> > > > 'gunma'/'group'/'collective'/'plurality')
> > > >
> > > > The first appears to indicate that masses are still first-class
> > > > entities, such that e.g. in {lo tadni cu sruri le dinju}, the referents
> > > > of {lo tadni} are masses of students, not individual students. In
> > > > particular, it is reasonable for that {lo tadni} to have just one
> > > > referent.
> > > >
> > > > The second appears to indicate that sumti can sometimes be 'flagged' as
> > > > being interpreted collectively - the referents are the same whether it
> > > > is so flagged or not, but if it is so flagged then a bridi involving it
> > > > is understood to hold of the mass consisting of the referents, rather
> > > > than distributively of the referents themselves.
> > > >
> > > > [...]
>
> --
> 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.
Attachment:
pgp3yKmTbCUnS.pgp
Description: PGP signature