WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


BPFK Section: gadri

One of my problems with Jorge's proposal is that it seems to either
conflate two different meanings into one, or have one meaning that is
ill-defined or hard to formalize. What I want is a general algorithm fo=
r
determining whether or not a sentence that uses XS-lo is true or false.

These examples are taken from an IRC discussion I had with xod.

{mi nitcu lo mikce} — obviously true (in the right circumstances)
Here, I take every {mikce} in the world, assign it to {xy.} and for eac=
h
one asks if {mi nitcu xy.} is true. If and only if there is no {xy.} fo=
r
which {mi nitcu xy.} is false, then {mi nitcu lo mikce} is true. No
problem here.

{lo prenu cu tarci} — obviously false
We are then looping through every {prenu}. There are some (actually all=
)
instances in which {xy. tarci} is false, therefore {lo prenu cu tarci} =
is
false. No problem here.

{lo prenu cu sadjo} — obviously true.
We are again looping through every {prenu}. There are some instances in
which {xy. sadjo} is false, therefore {lo prenu cu sadjo} is false. Whi=
ch
is patently wrong, but fits with how I understand XS-lo.

So. What is it that I'm missing here.

--=20
Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org=
/
P=E5 1300-tallet kom tersen. F=F8r og etter det var det meste bare rot,=
men
s=E5 kom Sch=F6nberg og ordnet opp. Puh. Endelig litt system. S=E5 klar=
te Arne
Nordheim =E5 rote det til igjen. — Under Dusken 08/2=
001