WikiDiscuss

Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote:

>--- xod <xod@thestonecutters.net> wrote:
> =20
>
>>That's irrelevant. When they do meet, the child should be forgiving.
>>This is not committing the child to the difficult task of seeking out
>>every adult. It is nonetheless a claim about every child and every adul=
t.
>> =20
>>
>
>To me {ei ro verba cu fraxu ro makcu prenu} means:
>"It ought to be the case that each child forgives each adult." =20
>
>What does {ei lo verba cu fraxu lo makcu prenu} mean according to you?
> =20
>

I must interpret it extensionally, resulting to "some children...some=20
adults", unchanged from the old-lo, and not a really as a maxim=20

• because* of it's lack of ro. And the hypotheticality given by .ei might=20

be enough to avoid nerdy criticism of "all". I used to think that the=20
non-specificity of lo forced the statement to apply to the entire type,=20
but now I don't.

>=20
> =20
>
>>Consider {.iinai so'u cinfo cu kalte ca lo nicte} vs.{.iicai so'a cinfo
>>cu kalte ca lo nicte}. The numbers of lions hunting at night is
>>completely crucial.=20
>> =20
>>
>
>In those claims, indeed it is. But in {ca lo nicte lo cinfo cu kalte=20
>lo cidja} no numbers are mentioned.
> =20
>

"Some lions hunt at night" means at least one does, and only means that=20
we can no longer say that none do. It doesn't tell us about the habits=20
of lions, which I cannot see as anything but a ro statement (if part of=20
the definition of lion) or a so'a statement (if an observed property,=20
god forbid you should neglect the outliers).

>>And if lions didn't exist, the warning would be
>>pointless — completely different from the intensional examples we cite=
..
>> =20
>>
>
>The fact that you can quantify does not mean that you must.
>If you want to be precise with tense, you can be. But Lojban does
>not force it upon you. If you want to be precise with number, you=20
>can be. But Lojban does not force it upon you. A claim with the=20
>minimal gadri {lo} cannot be false on account of number, because
>it doesn't carry any info on number.
> =20
>

Other than the trivial case of zero, I agree.

>>>>>>lo pa pixra cu se vamji lo ki'o valsi
>>>>>>One picture is worth a thousand words.
>>>>>> =20
>>>>>>
>>Nothing here convinces me that "a picture" is not simply code for "ever=
y
>>picture". This is an extensional claim about every picture, regardless
>>of its figurative sense.
>> =20
>>
>
>If you want to make the extensional claim, nothing stops you,
>but it has a different sense altogether. You'd be saying that
>every picture is very informative instead of comparing the
>informative value of pictures vs. words.
> =20
>

What's the difference? The informative value of pictures vs. words is=20
exactly a word:picture mapping.

>>How would you interpret "A woman should wear an apron"? Doesn't it mean=
t=3D
>>hat we=3D20
>>loop through every woman, point to her, and demand she wear an apron?
>> =20
>>
>
>It is very similar to "Every woman should wear an apron", yes.
>In Lojban you can be as precise or imprecise as you like.
>From least to most precise:
>
> ei lo ninmu cu dasni lo cragai
> =20
>

Here is where the meaning really changes. Above is a very weak claim,=20
below is much stronger. I won't assume that lo is ro, although it's not=20
ruled out. But this is normative usage, and there's a big difference=20
between a maxim the speaker feels should apply to the type, and an=20
observational statement which may or may not generalize to the type (and=20
thus lo equal ro).

> ei ro ninmu cu dasni lo cragai
> ei ro ninmu cu dasni su'o cragai
> ei ro ninmu cu dasni pa cragai
>
>And of course you can add tense:
>
> ei ro ninmu ca ca'o ca'a dasni pa cragai
>
>"Every woman should at this moment be actually wearing an apron."=20
>If you don't express the time some of them might argue that they
>wore one yesterday and so they already fulfilled their duty.
>
> =20
>
>>>>>>lo ctuca cu fendi lo selctu mu lo vo tadni
>>>>>>The teacher will divide the class
>>>>>>into five groups of four students.
>>>>>> =20
>>>>>>
>>What teacher? Any teacher? No, not any teacher. The teacher in the
>>example. Our hypothetical teacher about whom we know nothing except tha=
t
>>he's teaching Scooby Doo to a bunch of 3rd graders.=20
>> =20
>>
>
>And who might never exist, right.
> =20
>

He exists like a fictional story character. But I think we understand=20
each other here.

>>If each reference to
>>a teacher referred once again to any, non-specific teacher, each
>>sentence might refer to a bi'u teacher, rendering the script nonsensica=
l.
>>We could have given him a name, *unlike* the needed doctor.
>> =20
>>
>
>Not nonsensical, just more vague. But context will help sort it out.
>When telling a story we don't need to put a tense in every sentence,
>as usually things are told in the order they happened. You can, of
>course be more precise when you need or want to.
>
> =20
>
>>Suppose the instructions included a second teacher. Would that be any
>>teacher? Again no, because "any teacher" could include the first teache=
r.
>> =20
>>
>
>If it's important that it's about two teachers then you'd have to use
>number, of course. If it's irrelevant if there is one teacher or two
>conducting the lesson, you might not even mention number.
>=20
> =20
>
>>Furthermore, this example is totally prenexable: "Let there be a teache=
r.=3D
>> Let=3D20
>>there be a classroom..."
>> =20
>>
>
>Indeed, and there's nothing wrong with doing it that way.
>But let's get away from the idea that there is always one
>correct gadri for each situation and all the rest are wrong.
>{lo} is the most general gadri and so it will practically=20
>never be wrong in cases when another gadri is more precise.
>
>mu'o mi'e xorxes
>
>
>
>=09
> =09
>__
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
>http://messenger.yahoo.com/=20
>
>
> =20
>

--=20
Motorists honked in celebration in this Ramadi as news spread of the assa=
ssination of the president of the Iraqi Governing Council Ezzidin Salim M=
onday. "The GC is nothing," one man shouted. "They are not the Governing =
Council. They are the Prostitution Council."=20