[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lojban ML: Syllogism and sophism
Lojbab:
>>le vi karce cu klani li pasexa le ka la djan litru lo ki'otre
> be ce'upevo'e ce'upevo'a
>
>By using pe I am indicating only a loose association with the value of
vo'a.
>But we could be even looser be using le klani and le se klani.
The question is whether {ce'u} is like {ma}, which appears
independently every time, or whether it is like {ke'a}, which stands
for the same referent every time it appears within the relevant bridi.
I was assuming it was like {ke'a}, in which case the pe-restriction
is not enough to make it stand for two different slots.
>>What can be a cenba then in your opinion? A person can be a cenba and
>>remain the same person. An event can also be a cenba and remain
>>the same event. If the change is large enough it might mean that the
>>person is no longer the same person, or the event is no longer the
>>same event. Is that a problem?
>
>Then I would see it as a binxo, having a final state that is a different
>person or event from that which started.
Definitely a cenba can be a binxo. For example:
la djan cenba le ka ce'u skari makau
John changes in what colour he is.
la djan noi blanu cu binxo la djan noi crino
John, who was blue, becomes John, who is green.
lo blanu cu binxo lo crino
Someone blue becomes someone green.
I don't see one excluding the other.
>> In the x1 goes the object that
>>has that property.
>
>But to me it is NOT The object that has the properties in ka, but the
>relationship between ALL the objects that has the properties.
So you disagree with these:
la djan ckaji le ka ce'u blanu
John has the property of being blue.
la djan cenba le ka ce'u blanu
John changes in the property of being blue.
If you disagree that it is John (the object) that has the property
(le ka ce'u blanu) then you disagree with much of the refgrammar.
I know you must have meant something else.
>You see le ka ce'u djuno
>to be a property of a knower.
The property of being a knower, yes. A property that all knowers have
in common.
>I see leka djuno as being the properties of
>"knowing".
Are you thinking of {ce'u} in all places of djuno? If so, "relationship"
might be a better word for it than "properties".
> If I then add in ce'u I am focussing on certain aspects of those
>massed properties.
The number of open slots gives you the "adicity" of the relationship.
Two open slots gives you a dyadic relationship, which is what's
required for scales.
>> la djan cenba le ka ce'u cu'ekau blanu
>> John changes in the time/tense signature of his being blue.
>
>whereas for me it is lenu la djan blanu that is varying, and not John.
So if John goes from being a {co'a blanu} to being a {co'u blanu}
he is not varying? I don't see why not. Both John and {le nu la djan
blanu} can vary, each in their own properties.
> I
>cannot get past that point of the top of my head, but it is the event that
is
>varying and not the person referred to in the event. This just seems so
>basic to me that I cannot think clearly about it - it is more of an
underlying
>assumption about the nature of change or of events.
Well, maybe it's a metaphysical thing. I have no problem with both
the event and the person varying.
>> la djan cenba le ka ce'u blanu sela'u makau
>> John changes in the degree to which he is blue.
>
>This one seems particularly problematical to me. sela'u invokes the
>x1 of klani, and you would have a statement on this subject put John in the
>x1. I then start into a mind-boggle of sumti swapping that starts with:
>
> la djan cenba le ka ce'u blanu gi'e klani makau
> la djan cenba le ka ce'u blanu gi'e klani makau ma
> la djan cenba le ka ce'u blanu gi'e klani makau leka ce'u blanu
>and somewhere around there my mind senses an impending infinite loop and
stops
>trying.
Your mind is right, because {le ka ce'u blanu} by itself doesn't work
as a scale, so you'd have to use {le ka ce'uxipa blanu sela'u ce'uxire} and
then if you expand {sela'u} like you did before you do enter into an
infinite loop.
But then you can't ever use {sela'u} at all. For any bridi that uses it
you'd
run into the same problem:
i broda sela'u ko'a
i broda gi'e klani ko'a ma
i broda gi'e klani ko'a le ka ce'uxipa broda sela'u ce'uxire
and you're in the loop again.
The way out is to not choose {le ka ce'uxipa broda sela'u ce'uxire} as
the scale for the {sela'u}. Choosing that as the scale is indeed going
in circles. In the example above, we need a scale to measure blueness.
I don't know what that might be, but if you think that {ni blanu} is
sensible, then you can use as the scale whatever you would use as
the x2 of {ni blanu kei}. Let's call that ko'a. Then we have:
la djan cenba le ka ce'u blanu sela'u makau tela'u ko'a
John changes in the degree to which he is blue in scale koha.
>If I say that
>leka la djan blanu cu cenba, then given that blanu is a one place predicate
>the x2 is probably something like leka la djan cenba do'ekaumakau
You must mean {blanu} instead of that last {cenba}. How do you interpret
a property with no open slots? Does anyone or anything have that
property? For example, can I say:
la djan cu ckaji le ka la alis prami la djim
John has the property of Alice loving Jim.
I suppose that is not right. So, who has that property, only Alice and Jim?
But how about the property {le ka la alis prami la djim noi bruna la djan}.
Is that a different property?
And in what you propose:
le ka la djan blanu cu cenba le ka la djan blanu do'ekaumakau
le se cenba is not a property of le cenba. That does not agree with
the use of {cenba} in the refgram examples.
>To me when something varies, normally we assume that everything else stays
>the same, so I have merely reiterated the x1 and focussed on what is
changing
>with the kau marking. I have no idea if this actually fits how you see kau
>being used, of course.
It doesn't, but not because of kau itself but because of almost all the
rest: ce'u-less properties and le se cenba not being a property of le cenba.
co'o mi'e xorxes