Re: possible sumti-raising place structures of the sisku variety

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@GREBYN.COM>]

re facki - I included it because the "subject" could be an abstraction.
I think in general, all of the epistemology gismu have the same issue,
but included this one because facki and sisku are closely associated in my
mind.  Can you facki about lo danlriunikorni, or djuno, or anything else
if unicorns don't exist.  The same is true about kalte - can you hunt
for anything isomorphic to the empty set, or have we just pushed the
"lo nomei problem back from the obvious cases to the less obvious ones.
I personally think that however that question is resolved, it will turn out
that lo [empty set] must be taken as somewhat intensional, and that not
all empty sets are identical.  Or maybe the use of "lo broda" in a bridi
amounts to a "local claim of existence" for the purpose of evaluatiing the
sentence.  Galadriel is seeking a unicorn on the LOCAL assumption that it
exists.  This is not to claim that it exists or even that Galadriel or
any one else thinks it likely that it exists.  But I don't know enough
about logic or set theory to pretend to be able to reconcile this with the
issues that get raised regarding the question.  But I am terribly afraid
that kalte adn facki and djuno and mulno and virtually any other
bridi that can take a non-abstract in a non-agentive position (or possibly
even in an agentive position, but I can't come up with any mental examples)
in some circumstances, will result in problems when the referent of that
object turns out to be isomorphic with lo nomei.

I will have to look at other responses off line, but wuill wait to see
what everyone else says before speaking up futher (if possible).

lojbab