From pycyn@aol.com Mon Jun 11 06:19:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 11 Jun 2001 13:19:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 94754 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2001 13:19:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jun 2001 13:19:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r03.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.99) by mta1 with SMTP; 11 Jun 2001 13:19:13 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id r.f6.b30ee5e (3850) for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:19:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:19:09 EDT Subject: RE: zi'o and modals To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_f6.b30ee5e.28561f4d_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_f6.b30ee5e.28561f4d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit {zi'o} first came to marked attention on this list when somneone notice that the definition of {botpi} "bottle" involved a content and a cap, which a bottle by the side of the road typically lacked. So what was that bottle? Not exactly {botpi} since that gave an unspecified content, cap (and made-of material) nor {botpi noda fo noda} since it didn't contain nothing, just air and maybe a little water, neither of which was relevant to its being a bottle. So, in place of the set of four-tuples that was the referent class of {botpi}, we looked for a two-tuple < object, material> that would work for "bottle" as in English. And the way to name that relation was just to get rid of the references to content and cap: {zi'o} . Clearly, for any a,c such that satisfies {botpi} , satisfies {botpi zi'o fo zi'o}. Equally obviously, the converse does not hold: that bottle by the side of the road has neither content nor cap and so satisfies the elided predicate but not the full one. Similarly, {klama fi zio zi'o} is a new predicate, referencing a new relation, that is perhaps only incidentally related to {klama} in th sense outline above for {botpi}. It may be a mistake to even thing of it as a going. But it is more general only in the sense that more cases may fall under it, not that by itself it expresses a generalization of behavior. --part1_f6.b30ee5e.28561f4d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit {zi'o} first came to marked attention on this list when somneone notice that
the definition of {botpi} "bottle" involved a content and a cap, which a
bottle by the side of the road typically lacked. So what was that bottle?
Not exactly {botpi} since that gave an unspecified content, cap (and made-of
material) nor {botpi noda fo noda} since it didn't contain nothing, just air
and maybe a little water, neither of which was relevant to its being a
bottle. So, in place of the set of four-tuples <object, content, material,
cap> that was the referent class of {botpi}, we looked for a two-tuple <
object, material> that would work for "bottle" as in English. And the way to
name that relation was just to get rid of the references to content and cap:
{zi'o} . Clearly, for any a,c such that <a,b,c, d> satisfies {botpi} , <a,c>
satisfies {botpi zi'o fo zi'o}.
Equally obviously, the converse does not hold: that bottle by the side of the
road has neither content nor cap and so satisfies the elided predicate but
not the full one. Similarly, {klama fi zio zi'o} is a new predicate,
referencing a new relation, that is perhaps only incidentally related to
{klama} in th sense outline above for {botpi}. It may be a mistake to even
thing of it as a going. But it is more general only in the sense that more
cases may fall under it, not that by itself it expresses a generalization of
behavior. --part1_f6.b30ee5e.28561f4d_boundary--