From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Sep 29 10:36:17 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 29 Sep 2002 17:36:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 15715 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2002 17:36:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Sep 2002 17:36:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.102) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Sep 2002 17:36:16 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 10:36:16 -0700 Received: from 200.69.6.30 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 17:36:16 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 17:36:16 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Sep 2002 17:36:16.0776 (UTC) FILETIME=[B6D75080:01C267DE] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.69.6.30] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la djorden cusku di'e > > You are not taking > > into account that {e} has a scope of its own as well. When you > > split {paroi ko'a e ko'e} into {paroi ko'a ije paroi ko'e}, you're > > saying that {e} has scope over {paroi}. If {paroi} had scope over > > {e} you could not make the expansion. Expanding {e} is equivalent > > to exporting {ro} to the prenex. > >Where's the book say that? And strictly speaking btw, since the >claims of pavdei and reldei aren't related (e instead of jo'u) the >scoping of quantifiers from the first one won't change the meaning. >I don't think it makes sense to talk about quantifier scope for >{e}, which has no quantifiers. Whether the book says it or not in so many words, {e} does have scope. Consider {naku ko'a e ko'e broda}. You can't expand this to {naku ko'a broda ije naku ko'a brode}, precisely because {e} does not have scope over {naku}. But you can expand {ko'a e ko'e naku broda} to {ko'a naku broda ije ko'e naku broda}, because in this case {e} does have scope over {naku}. The relation between {e} and {ro} is not something I'm postulating for Lojban, it is something that is there as part of their logical meanings. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com