Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]:50364) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RTM0o-0006Pd-9Q; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:14:03 -0800 Received: by wwf10 with SMTP id 10sf441628wwf.16 for ; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:13:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-ct-class:x-ct-score:x-ct-refid:x-ct-spam :x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:organization :user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=qdAqnk6uwlx/TVe1jTjn1hc+PRg7hhC0GRaD6CpO+l8=; b=61dCI8zC82cFWu+C/5R/eX0hV71Y1k7x2N7ESKOC1pz4GvhIoAsiCJp5REG7x7tS/b WTsTbhEkMDBEHGlrxSLGVwA8jltsW4JZwgutJFB3yY9/IrUuNIgtiZoqR/14j+V9QrMO LdayRnIPGHQsoJFhzAZ/4iG1YFCGrltQYWa9M= Received: by 10.216.134.218 with SMTP id s68mr58282wei.57.1322090025032; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:13:45 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.94.74 with SMTP id m50ls407834eef.3.canary; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:13:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.213.22.2 with SMTP id l2mr1463975ebb.10.1322090023548; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:13:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.213.22.2 with SMTP id l2mr1463973ebb.10.1322090023513; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:13:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from eastrmfepo203.cox.net (eastrmfepo203.cox.net. [68.230.241.218]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id cn4si8919932vdb.3.2011.11.23.15.13.43; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:13:43 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.218 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.241.218; Received: from eastrmimpo306.cox.net ([68.230.241.238]) by eastrmfepo203.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20111123231343.BGCJ25070.eastrmfepo203.cox.net@eastrmimpo306.cox.net> for ; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:13:43 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([70.187.237.100]) by eastrmimpo306.cox.net with bizsmtp id 0nDi1i00B2AfMYu02nDitX; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:13:42 -0500 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020209.4ECD7E26.00CA,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=12 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=cdJjHAINPiZBdT+VAeFfLOvj93neuvwrRIGsWSZO+Cw= c=1 sm=1 a=dYDkaTZZu5wA:10 a=lSm0289xaPUA:10 a=xmHE3fpoGJwA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=MQZuvjT3xUZLKv0gclfWMg==:17 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=hTkoNp0ml80WNIAIcJYA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=dxBpO5_FDU0A:10 a=SENrbSCRQ4joeSWi:21 a=OeCuG-sl8rf6bfrY:21 a=MQZuvjT3xUZLKv0gclfWMg==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <4ECD7DA9.7040907@lojban.org> Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:11:37 -0500 From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] No title, since the subject will have changed by the time it gets there References: <1322084099.71575.YahooMailRC@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1322084099.71575.YahooMailRC@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.218 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / John E Clifford wrote: > 5. I always told my students that, for me, memory is not a pramana, but tends > to be spotty and self-aggrandizing, so I won't argue with Lojban about what I > said twenty yeara ago; he has the records (but I bet he can't find 'em). I found some, but not the right ones. I found one place where you discussed some other aspect of modals. I found the place where you first introduced the aspects (pu'o and za'o and the like. But I haven't found your discussion of CAhA *YET* %^) > And, of course, I may well have changed my mind over the years. You NEVER change you mind ... except when you do. zo'o > But still I am shocked to think I ever was pleased with a modal "can and does". You didn't call the members of CAhA "modals". They were alternatives to "ca'a" as interpretations for timeless claims (which people kept calling "tenseless tense"). And I think "flammable" was one of the concepts that was included in the discussion. I keep on thinking you used the words intensional and extensional somewhere in the discussion, but since I never really understood those words and you used them at other times, I could be wrong about said usage. lojbab -- Bob LeChevalier lojbab@lojban.org www.lojban.org President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.