From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Mar 05 16:56:37 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_1); 6 Mar 2003 00:56:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 75534 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2003 00:56:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Mar 2003 00:56:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Mar 2003 00:56:33 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 18qjgW-0005n2-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 16:56:32 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18qjgM-0005mg-00; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 16:56:23 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 05 Mar 2003 16:56:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18qjgG-0005mX-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 16:56:16 -0800 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 h26137CG038847 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:03:07 -0600 (CST) (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 h26137cB038846 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:03:07 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 19:03:07 -0600 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: The Any thread Message-ID: <20030306010307.GA38811@allusion.net> References: <200303052208.RAA00948@mail.reutershealth.com> <3E669565.4030902@bilkent.edu.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E669565.4030902@bilkent.edu.tr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-archive-position: 4385 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 --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 02:25:09AM +0200, robin wrote: > John Cowan wrote: > >Craig scripsit: > > > > > >>Umm... no. "I need a doctor." I have a need which will be filled if I a= m > >>attended to by Dr. Foo. However, I could equally well accept the servic= es=20 > >>of > >>Dr. Bar, so I don't actually need Dr. Foo. I need a doctor, according t= o=20 > >>my > >>view of lo, is "mi nitcu lo mikce". However, "zasti falo mikce poi mi k= e'a > >>na nitcu" is still true - I don't actually need Dr. Foo since Dr. Bar c= an > >>treat me. > > > > > >Thinking about doctors, IMHO, just confuses the issue. Take "I need a b= ox > >with dimensions 2m by 2m by 2cm." You can need such a thing perfectly w= ell > >even if there is no such box anywhere. This is why needing involves an > >implied proposition: you cannot, e.g. see such a box unless there is suc= h a > >box (neglecting visual illusions, where you see the *appearance* of a bo= x > >but not the box itself). > > > That's exactly the point I was trying to make about the semantics of=20 > "nitcu" and "pendo" being different. You can nitcu something even if=20 > that something does not exist, or perhaps could never exist (e.g. I want= =20 > to do something which requires the existence of the proverbial golden=20 > mountain). You cannot be a pendo of something unless there is something= =20 > to be a pendo of (although it doesn't have to exist in a physical sense=20 > - you can still say "I've got a friend in Jesus" even if Jesus never=20 > lived, or lived but was not resurrected - the point is that you have=20 > some specific entity in mind who is your friend, which is qualitatively=20 > different from needing a box which may or may not exist). This has=20 > nothing to do with the semantics of "lo". Well, because of the way lojban gadri work the term with "lo" in both "mi nitcu lo mikce" and "mi pendo lo mikce" must have the same meaning. Predicate semantics are limited to *their* meaning, not the meaning of terms in the same bridi. Dunno if this is what you were trying to say, or not. --=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 --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+Zp5LDrrilS51AZ8RAmPOAJ4ipR6XIrM4CnaHCClzJQeqE7Z4EwCfYBTi NpAu48gqKUFBMqAxR1UQS0c= =+OZt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy--