[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] "Any" and {ro}

la gleki, On 27/08/2012 17:00:



On Monday, August 27, 2012 7:14:28 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote:

    la gleki, On 27/08/2012 05:34:
     >
     >
     > On Saturday, August 25, 2012 10:58:19 PM UTC+4, And Rosta wrote:
     >
     > la gleki, On 25/08/2012 15:23:
     > > OK. Please translate
     > >
     > > "I could eat some specific apple from that basket, namely the yellow (all the others are red)"
     >
     > "mi su'o mu'ei citka le plise je se lanka be ta"
     >
     > > "I could eat any apple from that basket".
     >
     > "ro da poi ge plise gi se lanka ta zo'u mi su'o mu'ei citka da"
     > >
     > 1. So "Give me any three apples from the basket!" would be {ro da poi
     > plise zo'u ko su'omu'ei dunda ci da}?

    I think that means "For every bunch of apples, make it the case that you could give me three out of the bunch.

    For "Give me any three apples", I'd suggest "e'o do dunda mi lo plise cimei", or "e'o do mi dunda ci da poi plise". Maybe "ko dunda" would do, but afaik scope of ko isn't defined.

So it should be "*e'o do fi mi dunda fe ci da poi plise*".


Right.

Now translate "Give me three (specific) apples" - it will again be
translated as "e'o do fi mi dunda fe ci da poi plise".


No, it's "e'o do fi mi dunda fe le ci plise"


When I suggested

    da - some/any
    da su'a - any
    da su'anai - some specific

I was hinting at a scale (specific/ non-specific).


I understood, but I think it's a terrible idea, both because it's unnecessary -- the le/lo distinction does the job (possibly in tandem with scope relations) -- and is an abuse of "su'a".


It's something that was completely lost after xorlo reform ({le}
meant some objects that I have in mind and therefore worked much like
an attitudinal. I'm not suggesting restoring pre-xorlo rules, of
course).


No, "le" is specific; "in mind" is just a layperson's nonjargon gloss for "specific".

I don't know if there's a definite presentation of xorlo somewhere. At any rate, I maintained that, under xorlo, {le broda} = {lo co'e voi broda}.


I must acknowledge that {ro da zo'u mi su'omu'ei citka da} solves the
problem (and I want exactly this sentence rephrased without {zo'u}
like it's possible to do in English).


I don't think there's a zo'u-less version, and I don't think you should be wanting one either. Zo'uless versions are just abbreviations of zo'u versions; sometimes a zo'uless abbreviation is possible and sometimes one isn't.


But if adding {e'o} turns it into "For every bunch of apples, make it
the case that you could give me three out of the bunch." then it's
not a solution.


Why do you think that? Everything you want to say can be said, with transparent logical form and no abracadabras.


"any" (in this sense) is {su'o} number of apples from the set in the basket.

If we have 4 apples (numbered from 1 to 4) then "Give me three apples from the basket" would mean in all possible worlds ({romu'ei} ?) one of the following:
123
124
134
234

So here "Give me any three apples" = "In every possible world give me exactly three apples out of the 4 from that basket."


"Give me any three apples" is "Make it the case that there are three apples that you give me". Each of 123,124,134,234 will satisfy that request.

I don't see how the meaning of "Give me any three apples" requires invoking quantification over possible worlds.

--And.

--
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.