From rob@twcny.rr.com Wed Jun 20 12:29:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 20 Jun 2001 19:29:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 79952 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2001 19:28:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Jun 2001 19:28:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout4-0.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.120) by mta1 with SMTP; 20 Jun 2001 19:28:18 -0000 Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-1 [24.92.226.139]) by mailout4-0.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.2/RoadRunner 1.03) with ESMTP id f5KJQr823468 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:26:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from riff ([24.95.175.101]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:26:54 -0400 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15CnaD-0000Eo-00 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:24:09 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:24:09 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: possible worlds Message-ID: <20010620152409.B806@twcny.rr.com> Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com References: <8e.17392b9c.28616ace@aol.com> <20010619233732.A4343@twcny.rr.com> <20010620102146.H16921@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010620102146.H16921@digitalkingdom.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com From: Rob Speer On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:21:46AM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > I still don't find this as elegant as Loglan's {foi} and {fio}; those would be > > similar to Lojban modals or tenses, which would have a more useful role in the > > grammar of the sentence than a UI cmavo. However, at least this doesn't seem to > > leave a gaping conceptual hole in the language, and I suppose it's the best we > > can realistically achieve within the baseline. > > What's wrong with va'o? > > -Robin Nobody knows what it really means, for one thing. Also, most proponents of va'o suggest using it for ordinary if...then, which means it can't be a possible-world indicator as well. If va'o could be taken over to solely refer to possible worlds (and ordinary logic would use [gasp] the logical connectives!) it would be great, but I can't see that happening. -- Rob Speer