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

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>
> So make that {su'o na'e xabju cu turni ro xabju} - by analogy with the
> berets, you'd hae that meaning that one-or-more *kinds* of non-resident
> rule all residents - being something we could have deduced from {ro
> xabju cu se turni su'o na'e xabju}?

I don't see how you could deduce that one ore more kinds of
non-resident rule every resident from knowing that each resident is
ruled by one or more kinds of non-residents.

I don't see how you want to deduce EA from AE unless you have a
singleton domain for E or a singleton domain for A (or both).

It seems to me the only way you could do that is shift domains in
mid-deduction, which is not a valid move.

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.