From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Sep 10 12:02:22 2002
Return-Path: <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_0_1); 10 Sep 2002 19:02:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 71176 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2002 19:02:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Sep 2002 19:02:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.152)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Sep 2002 19:02:22 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
  Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:02:22 -0700
Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
  Tue, 10 Sep 2002 19:02:21 GMT
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Bcc: 
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: I like chocolate
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 19:02:21 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F152E5nCz0b4djKMQzf00001540@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2002 19:02:22.0572 (UTC) FILETIME=[980BFAC0:01C258FC]
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 pycyn cusku di'e

>Quantification does not enter ere at all in any interesting way.

>From my point of view quantification is the key issue here.

>Remember,
>in Lojban, all entities are on the same level in the grammar, so it is as
>easy to quantify over the members of a set of types or intensions (not
>necessarily the same thing, by the way) as of a set of dogs.

Yes. That's why {tu'o} is useful to block that ever present
quantification when it should not be there.

>One hopes that
>the type of a thing is not in the meaning of the word for that thing, 
>because
>that will lead to an infinite regress, circling forever around to get out 
>the
>type, given only tokens. Unless you wan to fall back on the bootstrapping
>empirical procedure of science and leave a forever incompletely specified
>type -- which makes talk of types pretty senseless against other locutions.

I certainly have no expectation of having a full specification
of a type in most cases. And I wouldn't know where to look for
the type other than in the meaning of the word.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com


