From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Aug 11 00:28:02 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GBRQx-0005ju-Dk for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:27:58 -0700 Received: from mout0.freenet.de ([194.97.50.131]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GBRQh-0005jk-VB for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:27:49 -0700 Received: from [194.97.55.148] (helo=mx5.freenet.de) by mout0.freenet.de with esmtpa (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1GBRQf-0006lW-BB for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:27:37 +0200 Received: from 160-215-dsl.kielnet.net ([89.27.215.160] helo=[192.168.0.2]) by mx5.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID m.graff@freenet.de) (Exim 4.62 #2) id 1GBRQf-0005LW-5Z for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:27:37 +0200 Message-ID: <44DC3160.70302@freenet.de> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:27:28 +0200 From: Michael Graff User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re^2: the articles "le" and "lo" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 3491 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: m.graff@freenet.de Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners coi lo se cinri be la lojban. [Is this correct? I've tried to greet some of them who are interested in lojban. What binds tighter? "se" or "be"?] > Many languages, such as Russian or Chinese, > don't have any articles at all. .u'e > Anything you want to say should be sayable with {lo} only. Okay, I want to follow your advice. If the lojban sentences in my next emails are improvable by the use of {le} please suggest such improvements so that I can understand the differences better. > The "really is" of {lo} has nothing to do with existence in the real world, > {lo xanri} for example refers to imaginary things. interesting. This problem of what-kind-of-existence is known to some mathematicians too. Mathematics is the art of highly precise fiction. Only a fraction of this mental universe seems to be applicable to the description of the physical universe; but this fraction fits astonishing well. > I hope my comments were of some help. mi ckire do lo se ciksi be do i. mi djica lenu mi ta'i lo troci cu jimpe la lojban. Michael.