* Sunday, 2011-10-16 at 20:09 -0700 - John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>:
> Ahah! "I ate disjunctively of something you like generally" or some such.
Something along those lines, yes.
The context here is that we're trying to see what happens if we throw
kinds out of the window (and also disjunctive predication, in whatever
sense it was there), and try to make do with normal things - including
properties, which I hope can replace pure-kind predications of the "I
like lions" kind (think of it as "I like lionness").
Martin
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Sun, October 16, 2011 8:56:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural
> variable
>
> * Sunday, 2011-10-16 at 20:49 -0300 - Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> > >> The drawback of that approach is that you cannot combine predications
> > >> that "resolve" differently.
> > [...]
> > > In any case, this drawback seems a rather small one to me.
> >
> > It's impotant though. For example, compare:
> >
> > (1) ca lo prulamnicte mi tavla su'o da poi do nelci ke'a
> > "Last night I talked to someone you like."
> >
> > (2) ca lo prulamnicte mi citka su'o da poi do nelci ke'a
> > "Last night I ate something you like."
> >
> > You want to accept (1) but reject (2), even though to me they have the
> > exact same logical structure.
Attachment:
pgp2DjFm7O4nb.pgp
Description: PGP signature