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

Re: [lojban] Speaker specificity: {.i da'i na vajni}



On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 7:35 AM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:

 Although, if {le} is defined as a name, then the other definition I showed is available to define {lo}. Then there would at least be a much clearer difference between the two gadri. 

The reason a Russell type quantifier is not quite right for "lo" is that we don't want "naku lo broda cu brode" to be true just because there are no brodas. The Frege/Strawson analysis is more in line with "lo", I think: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definite_description

That's the reason for "noi" in the definition, we don't want the description to share the illocutionary force of the claim, it has to be a presupposition or something like that. 

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.