Subject: Re: [lojban] a construal of lo'e & le'e

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:06:58 EST

In a message dated 10/30/2001 9:03:46 AM Central Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> Because the first {da} = {su'o da}, and (pace pc) the quantifier goes to 
> the prenex of the bridi it occurs in . The su'o can only bind variables 
> within
> its scope (= elements following it in the bridi it occurs in), so it cannot 
> bind variables in following sentences.
> 
> If {ije} does indeed allow binding to cross sentence boundaries, then this
> would require some special rule to get the su'o to have scope over the
> je. On reflection, I think the default position is that absent any such 
> special
> 

As I have noted before, there is an ambiguity is "sentence" as applied to 
Lojban and And is here taking one very narrow -- and generally disastrous -- 
version (it makes it ahrd to make generalizations for example). And also 
complicates this by a peculiar rule (which he says everyone uses though 
everyone else seems to violate it regulalry) about where quantifiers really 
go. Ignore him or become unable to say very much in normal Lojban.