Re: TECH: lambda and "ka" revisited

la lojbab. joi mi cusku be di'e casnu

> >> What if you have da, de, and le nanmu, and wish to lambda on
> >> le nanmu.
> >
> >Again, that makes no sense:  lambdacated sumti should be semantically
> >empty, or at most a "da poi", which is a variable ranging over a restricted
> >scope ("da poi broda" is a kind of "da" that can only refer to something
> >that broda's).
> 
> So I guess I should have used da, de and "di voi nanmu"?

When you put it that way, then you are clearer, but I do think "xe'u di
voi nanmu" is clearer then "xe'u le nanmu".  Unless the non-veridicality
of "nanmu" is critical here, though, "xe'u nanmu" does the job.

> OK, let me present a practical, if contrived, problem or two.
> 
> Team A is better (xagmau) than Team B in leka Their running backs' speed
> which I would have done as "leka le kelcnraninbeka cu sutra"
> 
> (I was going to say le mela runin. bek. , buit am unsure if that fits your
> new version of "me" %^)

No, it doesn't.

> I don;t see how to even elicit the required lambda variable, unles it is
> "leka le xu'eda kelcnraninbeka cu sutra".  Is this what you intend?

I had to think about this a bit.  I think the answer is

	le ka da poi se bende be xe'u de gi'e kelcnraninbeka cu sutra
	the property-of (X which is-a-team-member of Y and is-a-running-back)
		is-fast

where X is a purely local variable, but Y is the lambdacated one.
In symbolic English that is:

	being a y such that(there exists x : x is a team-member of y & x is a
		running back & x is fast)

This assumes that the place structure of "kelcnraninbeka" is just "x1 is
a running back".  If it's "x1 is a running back for team x2" then we
can get rid of the explicit "se bende" in favor of:

	le ka da poi kelcnraninbeka xe'u de cu sutra
	the property-of-being-Y such-that-the-X who is-a-running-back-for Y
		is fast.

or in notation:

	being a y such that (there exists X: X is a running back for Y &
		X is fast)

-- 
John Cowan					cowan@ccil.org
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.