On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:37 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote:
> From: Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@hidden.email>
>
> (1) le fekaki prmaki
> "the relation e of (one) loving (one)"
>
> Is it now the case that k is serving as a lambda operator, binding variables?
I wouldn't put it that way. "k" is as always merely a variable
separator. The binder would be "f", and it binds all the variables
that appear in its desinence except for the first one.
A yes, the old problem of connectives looking like quantifiers looking like variables, looking like whatever -- not a very perspicuous language so far.
And f isn't a binder either, just a predicate maker. So, just how this _expression_ work? It isn't a sentence nor a quantifier (over the relevant items), I guess it is justa formula looking for a place to go, in which case it is not really a useful topic for discussion when we are looking for properties or at least predicates or at least propositional functions.
I wouldn't call it a lambda operator either, because it doesn't do
what a lambda operator does, but then "ce'u" is called a lambda
variable in Lojban even though it isn't one, so...
Actually, on what appears to be the standard interpretation nowadays, it is one -- but only one and so rather useless.
> Not bad, so long as we don't talk about properties or their multi-holed analogs ("relation" could go either way, alas). And is a propositional function (as this seems to be) really the holed version of a state of affairs, as f seemed to indicate?
We have not so far seen any need to distinguish propositions from
states of affairs, or rather, we've had no need to refer to
propositions, so you can think of it as the holed version of a state
of affairs.
Well, someday you will have to deal with beliefs and the like and so will have to deal somehow with propositions. "It" being? multivalent properties or multivalent propositional functions or what?
co ma'a xrxe