From thanatos@dim.com Thu Feb 14 22:53:11 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: thanatos@dim.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 15 Feb 2002 06:53:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 79131 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2002 06:53:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m8.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 15 Feb 2002 06:53:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO supernova.dimensional.com) (206.124.0.11) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Feb 2002 06:53:10 -0000 Received: from p04.3c03.pm.dimcom.net (p04.3c03.pm.dimcom.net [206.124.3.116]) by supernova.dimensional.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g1F6r8X03775 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 23:53:08 -0700 (MST) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Non-logical AND in Tanru? Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 23:58:27 -0700 Message-ID: References: <140.98dda3d.299dc5ed@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <140.98dda3d.299dc5ed@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: EWC X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=45881577 X-Yahoo-Profile: thandim2000 On Thu, 14 Feb 2002 21:01:17 EST, pycyn@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 2/14/2002 5:03:39 PM Central Standard Time,=20 >thanatos@dim.com writes: >>{mi le zdani cu klama co ragve le rirxe le ckule} >What=20 >"across the river from the school going" might be is unclear: it is pretty= =20 >clearly not crossing the river. I would suppose that it means that my rou= te=20 >home is on the other side of the river from the school, but don't feel ver= y=20 >comfortable about taht. What did you intend? If I am going to a place across the river opposite of the school, then I am across the river opposite of the school type-of going. I may or may not be crossing the river, I may be starting from somewhere across the river opposite of the school, I may be going to somewhere across the river opposite of the school, but my going is somehow related to something across the river opposite of the school. Presumably the exact relation between my going and something across the river opposite of the school is understood in context. If it is true that I am across the river from the school type-of going, then it also true something exists across the river from the school, otherwise I couldn't be related even ambiguously to it by across the river from the school type-of going. That's what I mean by a simple tanru claiming that the seltau and tertau are true for some respective arguments. If the bridi containing the tanru is true, then the tertau holds true for some arguments (given in the bridi) and the seltau holds true for some arguments (left unspecified unless made explicit). If {mi broda klama} is true, then there must exist something that is broda for me to stand in an ambiguous broda klama relation to. --=20 EWC