From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Mar 19 11:18:23 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 19 Mar 2002 19:18:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 53011 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 18:31:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Mar 2002 18:31:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.113) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:31:40 -0800 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Logic course Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Mar 2002 18:31:40.0736 (UTC) FILETIME=[4FEFDC00:01C1CF74] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la greg cusku di'e >1){roda de zo'u li da su'i de du li no} The not-quite-equivalence of sumti and operands can be quite annoying. {li da} is not grammatical. You could write it as: roda de zo'u li no sumji da de or, if you insist with MEX: roda de zo'u li mo'e da su'i mo'e de du li no but {mo'e} has problems too. Some people say it is for dimensioned numbers, which would conflict with this use. Besides, the non-MEX form is much shorter. >(can only da de and di (w/ subscripts) be used as bound variables ?) In my opinion, the lerfu pronouns, the ko'a/fo'a series, the vo'a series, ri, ra, ru, all work just as much as bound variables as da, de, di. The only differenvce is in how the binding takes effect. >what does >1'){roxy. zy. zo'u li xy su'i zy. du li no} mean ? {ro xy zy} is a single number. You need {roboi xyboi zyboi} in the prenex. Other than that, I think it works. (Though I prefer the {sumji} version.) >how long do bound variables last, if propositions are logically connected ? You can use tu'e-tu'u if there is any doubt. >2){roda rode rodi zo'u du li da su'i de li da su'i di li no .inaja du li de >li di} Again, {li da} does not work. You can say: roda rode rodi zo'u ganai li no sumji da de e di gi de di du >3){da zo'u li xy. du li da pi'i da} What is xy here? A constant? da zo'u xy pilji da da >4){da zo'u li xy. du li da su'i da} da zo'u xy sumji da da >5){roda zo'u de zo'u li da du li de te'a re .inaja di zo'u li da du li di >pi'i vo} roda zo'u ganai de zo'u da tenfa de li re gi di zo'u da pilji di li vo mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com