WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


BPFK Section: gadri


Robin:
> It seems to me that this changes *all* usage of "PA lo", because
> suddenly when you said "pa lo broda" and meant "One broda", you don't
> *get* one broda anymore, you get one *group* of broda, which is very,
> very different.

No, you get one instance of brodas. What counts as an instance
depends on context, but the most normal instances are individual
brodas, at least in cases where brodas are normally individuated.
What counts as an instance in {pa djacu} is much more context
sensitive.

But this is nothing new. {ci lo djacu} always could be three
glasses of water or three lakes, depending on context.

> su'o pa lo prenu cu prami do
> At least one person loves you.
>
> http://www.lojban.org/files/brochures/lesson4.html
>
> In your version, this means "At least one group of people loves you",
> does it not?

No, "at least one instance of people loves you". In the case
of su'o surely it makes no difference anyway, because "group"
must include groups of one.

> 19 May 2003 14:23:19 <tsali> ci re'u ca pa lo cacra
>
> http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/lojban/2003_05_20-02_22.txt
>
> Again, your version would be "Three times in one *group* of hours".

(cire'u is the third time)

I'd say {cire'u lo cacra be li pa}.

> > > The regularity is in usage. The outer quantifier works the same for
> > > *all* gadri *except* lo.
> >
> > *all* is le and la, right?
> > It certainly doesn't work like that for loi, lei, lai, lo'i, le'i,
> > la'i, lo'e and le'e.
>
> You have very few examples of quantification of those ones. However,
> those all say "An outer quantifier can be used to indicate a subset of
> that cardinality ", or "subgroup" instead of subset. la and le say " An
> outer quantifier can be used to quantify over members of the group."

Right, so something very different.

> Ignoring lo'e and le'e, of course.
>
> If those two are different, I don't understand one or the other.

If you understand outer quantification of sets, please explain
it to me.

> The only example of quantification of these articles is "ro le verba",
> which helps very little.
>
> If "indicate a subset of that cardinality" and "quantify over members of
> the group" mean substantially different things, then on behalf of slow
> people everywhere I request more verbosity. "In other words, ..." would
> be nice. More examlpes would be nice too.

Consider the set {a, b, c}.

The subsets are:

{}, {a}, {b}, {c}, {a, b}, {b, c}, {a, c} and {a, b, c}.

Quantifying over the subsets would mean that you can say something
of up to eight objects. For example: Exactly four subsets of
{a, b, c} contain b as a member. That's NOT what quantifiers
on lo'i would seem to be for.

If the quantifier indicates a cardinality, as I wrote, then it
is not doing quantification over a set. It is not very clear at
all what it is doing, either, but presumably {pimu lo'i broda}
is something like a set with half the members of lo'i broda. There
are usually many such sets, and I don't really know how
{pimu lo'i} works. "at least one subset of half the cardinality
of the set"? Exactly one such subset? A generic such subset?

Fortunately all this is irrelevant, because we never talk about
such things in normal situations, and when we want to talk math
there are better ways of doing it (like using proper predicates
for "set", "subset", etc.)

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/