Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:41:10 -0500

[email-masked] wrote:

> {makau} is used to distinguish the value -- the output-- from the 
> argument (input). What you have written is a propositional function, 
> whose output is either a claim or a truth value for each pair of values 
> submitted.

Fair enough.

> I see we have to go throuhg the whole {ka}-{du'u} bit again 
> to sort that out, since there seem to be at least three versions still 
> floating around.

Okay, what's your view? Mine is that du'u and ka mean the same
thing, except for their x2 place, and for the default number of
ce'us (0 for du'u, 1 for ka).

> I am at a loss to figure out what a rule for a function is other than 
> either a program or some other form of specifying how to compute the 
> value in terms of more basic functions. But these turn out to be just 
> other expressions of the same function.

An expression of the function is not the name of a function.
So "le ve fancu fo la faktorial." (left out fo last time)
means "the program, or whatever, that expresses the factorial function."
This is a Good Thing.

> <Fancu4 is an *expression* (that is, a text or textoid).
> I don't know how to say "\x.x*2" as a text, primarily because
> I don't know how to MEX the dot.>
> 
> Must fancu4 be MEX and in lambda form? and is MEX always text and never 
> actual functions?

MEX is the obvious way of expressing a program (mathematical
expression). With the article "li" it refers to the value of the
program; with the article "me'o", which is wanted here, it refers
to the text of the program.

We just don't have anything defined for "\x.".

-- 
John Cowan <[email-masked]> http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_