From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Fri Sep 14 18:06:59 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 15 Sep 2001 01:06:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 74242 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2001 00:33:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142)
  by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Sep 2001 00:33:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mta02-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.42)
  by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Sep 2001 00:33:36 -0000
Received: from andrew ([62.253.84.163]) by mta02-svc.ntlworld.com
  (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP
  id <20010915003334.NOHM29790.mta02-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew>
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sat, 15 Sep 2001 01:33:34 +0100
Reply-To: <a.rosta@ntlworld.com>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] Set of answers encore
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 01:32:49 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMCECLELAA.a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <22.1bb3adb1.28cff427@aol.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>

pc:
> Lojbab, in the midst of his several-message-long "Write in lojban, not about
> it" screed (flame banked) did manage to clarify what is wrong with extension
> analysis vis a vis set of answers analysis: there are some answers which are
> not in the extension of the whatever minus Q-kau, as a function (the answers
> aren't the things that fit, but the whole expressions with them fitted in).
> As he noted, taking things makes no allowance for answers like (eliptically)
> "nothing," or {na'i}, which is always a possible answer. This also
> clarifies in what way {makau} is different from {ce'u}, for the latter does
> work in an extension-of sort of way.

If you mean "djuno lo du'u makau klama" where it is the case that no da
klama, then this is covered by the extension-of analysis:
{da de poi du'u da -extension-of lodu'u ce'u klama zo'u djuno de}
-- where no di klama, da is an empty set, and the knower knows it to
be the extension of lodu'u ce'u klama.

--And.