From lojbab@lojban.org Thu Jan 30 08:45:24 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 30 Jan 2003 16:45:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 96592 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2003 16:45:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Jan 2003 16:45:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao04.cox.net) (68.1.17.241) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Jan 2003 16:45:21 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20030130164521.NEMF22825.lakemtao04.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:45:21 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030130111032.036381d0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:43:27 -0500 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: loi preti be fi lo nincli zo'u tu'e In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030129215340.034cf800@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab At 01:49 PM 1/30/03 +0000, Martin Bays wrote: >Thank you muchly for this! You've cleared up a lot of fuzziness in my >understanding. Do you mind if I just ask you to check my understanding of >one passage, though? - > >On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > > At 02:00 AM 1/30/03 +0000, Martin Bays wrote: >[...] > > >And also - I'm assuming that plain [sumbasti] is equivalent to su'o pa > > >[sumbasti]. If not, what difference does putting a quantifier before the > > >[sumbasti] make? > > > > For DA that is correct. Since lerfu/KOhA are unbound, and presumed > > already-defined, I think they have implicit quantifier "ro" I guess that > > you COULD use a lerfu as a bound variable by *explicitly* quantifying it in > > a prenex. > >So are you saying that {.ibu poi broda zo'u} parallels {ro da poi broda >zo'u}, and {su'o .ibu poi broda zo'u} parallels {da poi broda zo'u}, and >that in both cases previous assignment of .ibu is overridden, at least for >the scope of the prenex (following the usual DA rules)? 1. This is neither "rules" (in that I doubt that anything discusses this topic) nor probably "usage" (in that anyone has tried it before, not that I've been paying attention). It is only my best judgement on how >I< would understand things if so used. 2. I think that it would be bad usage to reuse an explicitly assigned (with goi) .ibu merely by mentioning it in a prenex without deassigning it. 3. Getting past those two points, I think that an explicitly quantified unassigned .ibu ("su'o .ibu [poi broda zo'u]") might be understood as a da-like bound variable. Without the explicit quantification (as in your "ibu poi broda zo'u"), I think .ibu should be understood to have a definite value (but if it isn't currently assigned, who knows what that value is). Using .ibu as an alternative DA-series allows one to represent mathematical symbols in an equation more precisely, which suits the intent of MEX, but since its normal use is NOT as a quantified variable but as a pro-sumti, it should be explicitly quantified to make this clear. 4. I would NOT favor the use of .ibu as a quantified variable EXCEPT in a MEX context, where it is justified by supporting the international symbolic language of mathematics. >And just for >completeness - does it then, after the scope of the prenex has finished, >revert back to its pre-prenex assignment, or become unset? Any quantified variable becomes unset after its scope has ended in formal usage. As people have noted, simple connection with ".i" rather than I+JE is ambiguous as to whether scope continues, and so could informally continue the scope. >If I *have* understood you right here, firstly - good, that makes sense >and should be usable, and secondly - any objections if I start a Wiki page >on all this? I feel it's the kind of thing which should be explicitly >documented somewhere. Anyone can start a wiki page. You needn't be expert, and some people read the wiki that do not read the list, so you may get other comments. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org