Wiki page How to use xorlo changed
wrote:
>
> --- John E Clifford wrote:
> > AHAH. {mu lo bakni} is not a reference (as
> in
> > older Lojban) to a bunch of five cows drawn
> from
> > the bunch referred to by {lo bakni} but
> something
> > less somehow — it tells howmany there are
> and
> > what they do but without referring to them.
>
> That's right, but that is not a change.
> Quantifiers
> in logic are bridi operators, they don't refer,
> and
> quantifiers in Lojban have always been the
> usual
> quantifiers of logic.
>
> PA da zo'u da broda
>
> says: the sentence "x broda" is satisfied by
> exactly PA things.
> It makes no reference to the things that
> satisfy the sentence,
> it only says exactly how many they are.
That is of course a quantifier on a variable, not
on a description. Are you suddenly going to be
modular and insist that a quantifier in one
context always behaves just like a quantifier in
another (it won't even work on your system of
course)?
> > How
> > should the second reference to (well, the
> first
> > *reference* but the second indication
> of)these
> > five cows be expressed in full form?
>
> With {lo} in front you have a reference.
>
I think I prefer the old way and still need to
see some reason for changing. It can't be
practicality nor modularity nor consistency, so
what is it that is so pressing as to change 50
years of work?
I note again, of course, that none of this is in
the offical definitions as given (unless they
have changed recently).