Can you give one or two salient examples, distributed over thousands of years, of rejections of reducing conditionals to quantification over circumstances, and can you cite some of the grounds for the rejection?
It does seem to me that the repetition is unavoidable by mere reformulation, tho I do not discount the ingenuity of xorxes in finding a way. But the essential challenge of a logical language is to give logical forms that are repetitious or complicated a concise surface form.
The only direct connection to donkey sentences is that "most farmers that own a donkey beat it" appears to require repetition in the underlying logical form.
On 18 Oct 2011 03:54, "John E Clifford" <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:--
It seems that, if you insist on going over to occurrences, you are going to get
stuck with repetitions. I don't know any particular logical reason to drop
conditionals in favor of occurrences (and several thousand years of people
rejecting that idea against it). In any case, what does this have to do with
Lojban, which, by definition, has no grammatical donkey sentences, since these
are just the sort of things that logical languages weed out. Apparent cases
are either ungrammatical or misinterpreted (assuming the claims about Lojban are
true).
----- Original Message ----
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.comSent: Mon, October 17, 2011 6:54:58 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially qua...Jorge Llambías, On 17/10/2011 02:55:
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 10:11 PM, And Rosta<and.rosta@gmail.c...--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"lojban" group.
To po...