Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 3:22 PM, And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:
> Martin Bays, On 24/10/2011 16:14:
>> * Sunday, 2011-10-23 at 18:57 -0400 - John E.
>> Clifford<kali9putra@yahoo.com>:
>>>
>>> On kinds, my position is just that kinds (if you want to use that
>>> word) are just biggest bunches viewed in certain ways and so call for
>>> nothing other than things of the ordinary sort.
>>
>> I seem to be in agreement. But I guess no-one else is, so far.
>
> I don't think me and xorxes disagree with you and John. If there is
> disagreement, it is over how many are in the biggest bunches. You, I gather,
> would say that there is only one possible cardinality for the biggest bunch
> of broda, whereas xorxes and I would say that the universe, or universe of
> discourse, can be understood in infinitely many different ways, such that
> across these different ways the cardinality for the biggest bunch of broda
> varies from one to infinity. I think xorxes and me would also say that this
> holds also of referents of {la}, and also pronouns like {mi, do}, and that
> these biggest bunches are treated like individuals.

That sounds right.

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.