From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Mar 13 07:35:44 2002
Return-Path: <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: unknown); 13 Mar 2002 15:35:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 29710 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2002 15:35:43 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167)
  by m6.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Mar 2002 15:35:43 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.125)
  by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Mar 2002 15:35:43 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
  Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:35:43 -0800
Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
  Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:35:41 GMT
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Bcc: 
Subject: Re: [lojban] More about quantifiers
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:35:41 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F125B8OVa6Ql9RnvR2G00004bc7@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Mar 2002 15:35:43.0262 (UTC) FILETIME=[BCB6ABE0:01C1CAA4]
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2]
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566
X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000


la and cusku di'e

>Perhaps "ro lu'a lo'i broda" is not importing either -- I don't think 
>that's
>been discussed at all.

For me it is not importing. I think pc might say {ro lu'a lo'i broda}
is nonsense when {lo'i broda} is the empty set.

>I have to concede that, from my *severely* limited knowledge of
>restricted quantification, r.q. is importing,

I wouldn't know how to check that. Would you say for example that
this page is wrong:

http://www.wabash.edu/depart/Phil/classmaterials/Phil3F99/Phil3txt/Phil3txt7/Phil3txt73/Phil3txt733.html

When it moves very freely from restricted form (Ax:Sx)Px
to unrestricted Ax(Sx->Px)

>I am fairly confident that this entire thread will have zero effect on
>usage, but the participants seem to have derived pleasure from it,
>which is enough.

I did. I think the introduction of the +/- notation in this
round of the discussion was a big step forward, as we can now
avoid the "A entails I, no it doesn't, yes it does" silliness.
Everybody agrees that A+ entails I+ and that A- does not
entail I+.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.


