From xod@thestonecutters.net Mon Mar 03 14:02:21 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 3 Mar 2003 22:02:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 38356 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2003 22:02:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2003 22:02:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Mar 2003 22:02:16 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 18py0m-0002nr-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:02:16 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18py0H-0002ha-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:01:45 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:01:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18pxzs-0002hL-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:01:20 -0800 Received: from granite.thestonecutters.net (localhost.thestonecutters.net [127.0.0.1]) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.12.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h23M1OXd055735; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:01:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) with ESMTP id h23M1O65055732; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:01:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) X-Authentication-Warning: granite.thestonecutters.net: xod owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:01:23 -0500 (EST) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: [lojban] Re: The Any thread In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030303164408.X38820-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 4303 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, jjllambias2000 wrote: > > Suppose that the folllowing are all true: > > la meris pendo la djan noi mikce > la meris na pendo la fred noi mikce > la meris na pendo la alis noi mikce > > Can we assert, based on that info, that: > > la meris pendo lo mikce > > ? Yes, Mary is friend to at least one doctor, namely > John. That of course does not mean that Mary is friend to > any doctor. "Is Mary the friend of any doctor at all? Does she have any friends who are doctors?" "Why, yes, she is the friend of a doctor." > If someone asks: > > xu la meris pendo lo mikce > > We have to answer {go'i}, she is the friend of at > least one doctor. How one can be a friend to a nonspecific doctor is hard to imagine. > Now, let's say that: > > la meris nitcu la djan noi mikce > la meris na nitcu la fred noi mikce > la meris na nitcu la alis noi mikce > > Can we assert, based on the above info, that > > la meris nitcu lo mikce > > ? Does Mary need at least one doctor? Yes, she does > need at least one doctor. If someone asks: > > xu la meris nitcu lo mikce > > we will answer {go'i}. She needs at least one doctor, > namely John. But the John-ness is lost when you use lo mikce. Under what circumstances, assuming cooperative communication, would you say such a thing? Only if there was no specific doctor identity to work with. Had there been a specific doctor she needed, you surely would have used le instead. > That again does not at all mean that > Mary needs any doctor, all we are saying is that there > is at least one that she needs. > > The way Xod and Craig want to use {lo} is not how it has > been defined, but there certainly is a need for that other > meaning. I use {lo'e} for that other meaning, but I would > favour changing {lo} for that function, because it is > very frequent and basic. That would change the meaning > of {la meris pendo lo mikce} to "Mary is friendly to doctors", > a generic statement, rather than the concrete meaning "Mary > is friend to at least one doctor" that it has now. lo'e is a little heavy-handed. It achieves its nonspecificity by stripping all distinction away from the doctors. "friendly to doctors" doesn't necessarily apply to nontypical doctors, whereas lo mikce does include them -- What would Jesus bomb?