From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun Sep 29 16:40:35 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 29 Sep 2002 23:40:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 52088 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2002 23:40:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Sep 2002 23:40:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Sep 2002 23:40:34 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17vnii-0006gD-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:43:28 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17vnhw-0006fi-00; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:42:40 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17vnhW-0006fY-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:42:14 -0700 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g8TNkMGZ057389 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 18:46:22 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g8TNkHe7057388 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 18:46:17 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 18:46:17 -0500 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu Message-ID: <20020929234617.GA57203@allusion.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 1741 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out --ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 08:58:19PM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote: > la djorden cusku di'e > >First of all, what you're talking about here is totally different: > >na behaves differently because it needs to export to the leftmost > >end of the prenex (inverting any quantifiers) before being interpreted. >=20 > I did not use {na}. I used {naku} both times, which exports in the > order where it appears. {na} goes directly to the leftmost without > inverting anything. I was, of course, refering to naku. > >Next, though, is that all of the above interpretations work provided > >that ko'a and ko'e either can do quantifier inversion automatically > >(which I think makes sense) or that in this case they were bound > >to single items so inversion is a no op: > > naku ko'a .e ko'e broda =3D=3D > > naku zo'u ko'a .e ko'e broda =3D=3D > > naku zo'u ge ko'a broda gi ko'e broda > >It is false that: ko'a and ko'e broda. >=20 > Correct so far. >=20 > >This is the truth function FFFT, >=20 > Nope. It is the negation of TFFF, i.e. FTTT. > It is the case that either ko'a is not broda > or ko'e is not broda (or both). In other words: > naku ko'a broda ija naku ko'e broda You're right. > Just as passing a negation through {ro} changes it to {su'o}, > passing a negation through {e} changes it to {a}. >=20 > The rest is an expansion of {ko'a e ko'e naku broda}: >=20 > >which you can get with > > ko'a na.enai ko'e broda > > ko'a .e ko'e na broda > >or > > ko'a na broda .ijenai ko'e broda > > ko'a na broda .ije ko'e na broda > >which means > > naku ko'a broda .ije naku ko'e broda =3D=3D > > naku zo'u ko'a broda .ije naku zo'u ko'e broda > >works fine. >=20 > See the section starting on pg. 407. I dunno where that is; I don't have a hardcopy (chapter+section is better). But you're right about the expansions since I misthunk the truth function. > >I'm not even sure what the relation you're suggesting is anyway. > >You have "ko'a .e ko'e" and can say "ro le re broda" meaning the > >same thing... so what? You can always say the same thing in many > >different ways, and the transformation loses information. >=20 > It's deeper than that. You can think of a quantification with > {ro} as a long string of conjunctions: >=20 > ro broda =3D le broda e le broda e le broda e le broda e ... >=20 > where each {le broda} picks one member of {lo'i broda}. > See also >=20 > http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?DeMorgan%27s%20Laws >=20 > for more about this. So e has scope then, and it matters where you put the naku boundary with regard to it, etc. But I still don't see the relevance here to which convention is used for tag+sumti scoping. We still can interpret paroiku ko'a .e ko'e broda as ko'a paroi broda .ije ko'e paroi broda because floating tenses work differently than naku. And paroi ko'a .e ko'e broda as paroi ko'a broda .ije paroi ko'e broda --=20 Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u sei la mark. tuen. cusku --ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9l5DIDrrilS51AZ8RAiVwAKC+kLyRLp9fBpz4y/rah9YPAzBSoACbBFkL N6Xyyd7XI/zCEXs5byEYT+k= =5MNn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv--