From thanatos@dim.com Wed Feb 13 15:05:51 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: thanatos@dim.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 13 Feb 2002 23:05:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 88651 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2002 23:05:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2002 23:05:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO supernova.dimensional.com) (206.124.0.11) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Feb 2002 23:05:50 -0000 Received: from p46.3c04.pm.dimcom.net (p46.3c04.pm.dimcom.net [206.124.3.206]) by supernova.dimensional.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g1DN5m409062 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:05:48 -0700 (MST) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Non-logical AND in Tanru? Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:11:04 -0700 Message-ID: References: <123.bbbdb05.299be8a1@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <123.bbbdb05.299be8a1@aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: thanatos@dim.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=45881577 X-Yahoo-Profile: thandim2000 On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:04:49 EST, pycyn@aol.com wrote: I wrote: >>{lo mirli cu finpe je mirli} is similarly weird because while {lo mirli >>cu mirli} is true, one would wonder why "finpe" was mentioned at all if >>we weren't using the "je" to claim {lo mirli .a lo se mirli ga finpe gi >>se finpe}. Either it's false or we've inserted "finpe" with contrary >>clues to what its sumti are.> >Well, the conclusion is right here, but I am not so sure about the reasoni= ng.=20 >What do the species or breed or whatevver of deer and fish have to do with= =20 >the case? I finally thought of an example that might clarify things a bit more. If {mi ti poi xunre cu klama}, am I a possible referent of {lo xunre je klama}? I'm easily {lo xunre klama}, but is {ti xunre gi'e se klama mi} enough to claim {mi ti xunre je klama}? Of at least one of the given sumti {xunre} is true at the same time {klama} is true for all of them, so two true claims are made of the given sumti with the two given selbri, if the choice of sumti for {xunre} is ambiguous. That ambiguity could lead to things like {mi tu berti je klama do} having as a possible interpretation, "I am going to that yonder from you, that yonder being north", and that may be a little too ambiguous, but it makes jeks more useful than forcing that to mean "I am going to that yonder from you and I am north of something." So there's some actually useful and not necessarily false examples. :) --=20 EWC