From a-rosta@alphaphe.com Sun Aug 11 11:51:58 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a-rosta@alphaphe.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 11 Aug 2002 18:51:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 50894 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2002 18:51:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Aug 2002 18:51:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.alphaphe.net) (217.33.150.223) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Aug 2002 18:51:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 21748 invoked by uid 101); 11 Aug 2002 18:51:47 -0000 Received: from host213-120-6-157.webport.bt.net (HELO oemcomputer) (213.120.6.157) by smtp.alphaphe.net with SMTP; 11 Aug 2002 18:51:47 -0000 To: Subject: RE: [lojban] x3 of dasni Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 19:53:19 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <18a.c35c6b4.2a87cc98@aol.com> X-EDATA: smtp.alphaphe.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AlphaPhe.Net (www.alphaphe.net) From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110020381 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin > From: pycyn@aol.com [mailto:pycyn@aol.com] > jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > >Apparently, you find even the intensional reading of > >L1 objectionable, > (You must have meant "extensional reading" up there. > No, I meant "intensional, as the full context makes clear(er?). The > rest of your comments thus are a bit off the mark. Naturally (i.e. as a law of nature) I agreed with Jorge, but I wonder whether the crux of the disagreement between you is what it means to say "there is a" - as in "There is a coat that I wear the blanket as". Jorge says that's not what "I wear the blanket as a coat" means, and you say it is. If we evaluate the claim over the universe of actual things, then Jorge is right. If we evaluate it over the universe of actual and imaginary things, then pc is right. Allegedly, the distinction is disambiguated by "lo ka'e kosta" v. "lo ca'a kosta" or "lo pu'i kosta" (I don't know what the difference between those two is), but I doubt that usage bears that out, since usage tends to reflect the ma'oste glosses of 'capability', and not the rather different notion of selection of universes of individuals. --And.