Response to And on Names

[Logical Language Group <cbmvax!uunet!GREBYN.COM!cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu!lojbab>]

And writes:
>If Lojban doesn't have names like English does, it leads to an
>interesting situation.  _La bob_ doesn't mean "entity named bob" because
>there aren't any names.  Rather, it means "entity belonging to a
>category denoted by the word _bob_, having unpredictable membership".
>The category "bob" is an extensionally defined set.  So when we meet
>someone for the first time, we should ask not "What is your name" but
>"which 'LA set' do you belong to", where 'LA set' is a term covering all
>categories introduced by the word _la_, _lai_, etc.

No.  The la/lai/la'i descriptor are designators.  "la bab." means the
one I am labelling with the name "bab."  The restrictive clause is to
help the listener identify which of the things he/she believes I might
be referring to by "bab." is the one I actually intend.  When I use "la
bab."  I have a specific individual or individuals named Bob in mind
that I am referring to, so from the Lojbanic speaker point of view,
there is nothing 'unpredictable' about it.  The listener may not know
who I am calling "la bab.", but that just means communication is not
effective.  It would be the same as if I used "X" in English where one
would expect a name - you know I'm referring to someone, even though
undoubtedly the person in question is not normally called 'X'.

Lojban does not consider names to be predicates in themselves; they are
merely word-symbols.  They must be quoted, to talk of them as
words/symbols, or marked with la/lai/la'i to talk about their referents.
Thus "la bab." is also "la'e zo bab."  The result is a sumti, not a
selbri, so we cannot be talking about predicates here.

We have the gismu "cmene" which has the place structure "x1 is the name
of x2 as called by x3".  "zo bab." is a possible value for x1.  The way
you ask the question, as with any sumti question, is with "ma".

ma    cmene le mrilu be dei     ri
What? names the mailer of this  as called by himself

with answer

"zo bab. go'i
"Bob"    does (names ...).

I don't accept the concept of a 2 place predicate for a name, because
names are always as used by a namer/caller (barring some philosophies
that deal in 'true' or 'absolute' names).  "la" by itself does not
capture this, essence - nor do its relatives lai and la'i.

Now it is perfectly possible for me the speaker to be talking about all
the people named Bob by anyone when I say "lai bab.", but you could
never tell the difference, because something true of a mass component is
generally considered true of the greater mass.

lojbab