From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Apr 17 12:20:45 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LutcD-0000dP-UE for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:20:45 -0700 Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LutcA-0000cw-BK for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:20:45 -0700 Received: from chausie ([71.75.215.96]) by cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20090417192034941.CVBU29019.cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com> for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:20:34 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chausie (Postfix) with ESMTP id A228E3D75 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:20:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: du & mintu Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:20:29 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <4de8c3930904170755t415ec77byc42e8417e7764b3f@mail.gmail.com> <4de8c3930904171149r2605f6d1y8030807c705b4570@mail.gmail.com> <5715b9300904171210i49d03792ta0cf8df85507c4a9@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5715b9300904171210i49d03792ta0cf8df85507c4a9@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200904171520.30798.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "chain.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Friday 17 April 2009 15:10:08 Luke Bergen wrote: > mmm, good point. Again, I'm really not sure about this so please, anyone > with more experience jump in if I have this wrong but the way I see it is > as follows: > > du creates the closest relationship in saying that these two labels refer > to the same actual object > > mintu is next in that it says that the two objects are "interchangeable" so > they are identical in every conceivable way but are still two distinct > objects. > > dunli means that the two objects are congruent/equal to but since it gives > the x3 position to specify in what property they are equal I understand > dunli to mean that they aX-archive-position: 1546 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Friday 17 April 2009 15:10:08 Luke Bergen wrote: > mmm, good point. Again, I'm really not sure about this so please, anyone > with more experience jump in if I have this wrong but the way I see it is > as follows: > > du creates the closest relationship in saying that these two labels refer > to the same actual object > > mintu is next in that it says that the two objects are "interchangeable" so > they are identical in every conceivable way but are still two distinct > objects. > > dunli means that the two objects are congruent/equal to but since it gives > the x3 position to specify in what property they are equal I understand > dunli to mean that they are equal in some way, not necissarily in EVERY > way. > > long story short: IMO du makes labels refer to same object. mintu makes > distinct objects identical. dunli makes two distinct objects equal in some > property x3 la tcan. dunli la .en. le ka jgina .i la tcan. na du la .en .i xu la tcan. mintu la .en? (I had a hard time typing that. I kept typing "e.n.") mu'omi'e .pier.