From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Sep 18 13:21:32 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 18 Sep 2002 20:21:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 30659 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2002 20:21:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Sep 2002 20:21:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.233) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Sep 2002 20:21:31 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 13:21:31 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 20:21:31 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: I like chocolate Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 20:21:31 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Sep 2002 20:21:31.0774 (UTC) FILETIME=[FA18B1E0:01C25F50] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la pycyn cusku di'e >tu'o du'u ce'u kairbroda tu'o du'u ce'u brode kei du tu'o ce'u broda da poi >ckaji tu'o du'u ce'u brode (I think you're missing a {kei}, or just use {cu du} to make it simpler.) But that is not the {kairbroda} I was using! ><< >And {kairbroda} is an ordinary jvajvo from {ckaji broda}, with >place structure b1 (b2=c1) c2 b3 b4 b5 ... > >> >An ordinary jvajvo with an extraordinary semantics: (b2=c1) is dropped (not >unusual) but plays an active role -- and is quantified to boot. Only in your version, not in mine. In my version (b2=c1) plays no active role and the lujvo has ordinary semantics. (It has no problems with negations for example, as I suspect yours might.) >I don't see why you would want the {sisku} back; it almost always gives the >srong results, making it seem like there is a particular ... I am looking >for, when any would do: exactly your problem which led to your supposedly >improved {lo'e}. It never gives the wrong results: mi sisku le mi santa: I look for my umbrella. mi sisku lo santa: There is an umbrella that I seek. mi sisku lo'e santa: I look for an umbrella (any will do). Simple and no wrong results. Compare with official sisku: mi sisku le ka ce'u du le mi santa: I look for my umbrella. da poi santa zo'u mi sisku le ka ce'u du da: There is an umbrella that I seek. mi sisku le ka ce'u santa: I look for an umbrella (any will do). Complicated and messy. (But strictly equivalent to my way of doing it.) >Some minor proofs, using real lambdas this time -- the {ce'u}s are a pain.. >kairbroda is \x \z(Ey(x broda y & y ckaji z) Not my {kairbroda}! I must have: broda is \x \y(x kairbroda tu'o du'u ce'u = y) which doesn't work with your {kairbroda}. >a broda loe' brode = [...] = a broda lo brode. My definition of {lo'e} given in terms of my {kairbroda} does not work with your definition of {kairbroda}, of course. That's not surprising. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com