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

Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2


On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
* Sunday, 2014-10-05 at 14:10 -0300 - Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:

> I guess "li mo'e sumti-6 te'u lo'o" has to be equivalent to "sumti-6",
> but I don't know what happens when a quantifier or a logical
> connective gets involved. Maybe "li mo'e ci ko'a" = "lo ci ko'a", and
> "li mo'e ko'a .e ko'e" = "ko'a jo'u ko'e".

I don't see how you get those. I get:

broda li mo'e ko'a e ko'e ->
    (broda( ,[{ko'a}]) /\ broda( ,[{ko'e}]))
    ge broda li mo'e ko'a te'u lo'o gi broda li mo'e ko'e te'u lo'o

That's assuming that "li mo'e ko'a .e ko'e" = "li mo'e ko'a je mo'e ko'e" = "li mo'e ko'a .e li mo'e ko'e".

That would mean, for example, that "li (_expression_)" does not always refer to the value of the _expression_ but can be some operation transforming the bridi in which it occurs as an argument. My take is that sumti-6 is generally just a constant (or a function if it contains internally unbound variables). I'm not sure if that's the correct interpretation, but it seems to be the simplest. (There are also some weird cases like "ko", "ma", and "zi'o" that need to be treated separately.) 

> > Uhoh.
> > So if there are five contextually relevant apples, you would never
> > understand {lo plise goi ko'a} to be referring to just one of them?
>
> How would I know which one?

What if you could guess from context? e.g. only one is red, and I say
{lo plise cu xunre}. You seem to be saying that this must involve
a universe shift to exclude the other four?

Either that, or interpret that Apple can be red over here and not red elsewhere. Just as if I say "lo plise cu makcu" I'm not necessarily claiming it has always been so. I might respond something like "ie lo vi plise cu xunre", or "pa lo plise cu xunre", to make sure we are on the same page about what we mean to refer to with "lo plise".

So are you saying that {lo plise} *always* refers to Apple? Such that
it isn't really a matter of presuppositions after all, but rather of
ensuring our universes are equipped with kinds?

I don't think so. What things are or are not in the universe of discourse is a matter of interpretation, and doesn't really affect the logical form. The presupposition is that when you use "lo plise" there's something you are talking about, and that something is identified by their satisfying the predicate "plise". Kinds may be one candidate interpretation, especially with so little context.

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.