From jjllambias@hotmail.com Mon Sep 23 07:53:25 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 23 Sep 2002 14:53:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 6602 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2002 14:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Sep 2002 14:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.60) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Sep 2002 14:53:25 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 07:53:24 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:53:23 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] tu'o usage Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:53:23 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Sep 2002 14:53:24.0089 (UTC) FILETIME=[F7631E90:01C26310] 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 >So the point here is that uttering a sentence with {lo INNER broda} in it >-- >even if INNER is implicit -- commits you to there being INNER broda. But when INNER is {ro} (which is the default) it is always the case that there are ro broda with non-importing ro, and there is therefore no commitment. (The outer {su'o} of course does require there to be at least one.) >We do not say that the negation of {lo broda cu brode}, {lo brode na brode} >is going to result in {ro lo me'iro brode naku brode} when we move the >negation through, Of course not! That's nonsense whether the inner quantifier is claimed or presupposed. >but just {ro lo broda naku brode} where {lo broda} is still >implictly {lo ro broda} (I'm not even sure just what {me'iro} might mean as >an INNER). {me'iro} is nonsense as inner, because the inner is always {ro}, and {me'iro} can't be {ro}. "Inner quantifiers" are not quantifiers. They make a claim or a presupposition about the _cardinality_ of the underlying set, they do not quantify over it. (In the case of non-importing {ro} no claim is made nor presupposed about the cardinality, so the question does not even come up.) mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx