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

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> * Sunday, 2011-11-06 at 17:15 -0300 - Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
>
>>  I
>> think you would need to say that everything is either a beret, a
>> bowler, or neither. (And the double exclusive or is hard!)
>
> Hmm? Why not just {no da ranmapku gi'e bolmapku}?

Right, that's equivalent.

>> And even so, mere set disjointness doesn't seem to get at the heart of
>> the matter, which is probably in the x3 of klesi:
>>
>> "lo ranmapku jo'u lo bolmapku cu ficysi'u lo ka ce'u klesi lo mapku ma kau"
>
> Yes, good. So I'd want to add three characters:
> {lo ranmaplei jo'u lo bolmaplei cu ficysi'u lo ka ce'u klesi lo maplei ma kau}

You could extend that method to all predicates. So instead of:

  lo prenu cu klama lo zarci lo zdani lo dargu lo karce

you can say:

  lo prekla cu klama lo zacyselkla lo zdaterkla lo dagvelkla lo karcyxelkla

>> >> Why is beret - hat - garment artificial?
>> > But they're all on the same level, no?
>> As kinds? A beret is a kind of hat, and a hat is a kind of garment.
>
> I'm only seeing two levels there - one containing berets and hats, and
> one containing kinds of hat and kinds of garment.

One level contains the garment, next level down the hat, next level
down the beret (and a fourth level I hadn't mentioned because it won't
enter into a klesi relationship contains some particular individual
beret.) So "klesi" relates two things from different levels.

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.