Received: from mail-ea0-f189.google.com ([209.85.215.189]:56384) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TPHet-0001O2-2C; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:51:08 -0700 Received: by mail-ea0-f189.google.com with SMTP id l12sf287031eaa.16 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:50:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent: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; bh=A6EIqjoyU+rLgOfm+0F0+8ES/oxk3eQOKXlZpyjAPug=; b=y7sk5XMarD6X3Tnd5hUx+8+doPCf/JZfpttLW0+AvSLz2Ycc7WHONM+DPrEwHuBu4F 0FEwPEU5gnsFhYrwZPNslMQatukekZotChdQXCKXdA8JU1v6VefBg8kiJpKDpW0TWeOe wS+yTdsJ8JxLAfPqHFG31hERYI0q3NUPsxQWOKcbTZDuayearGjkSy94PlwF7DUZpZI2 xcKP1neB2ocLuhK3MRZyTxOj+IJN1s+RyYhYnKYbNKi+G2yVhe1wMpaFcIBNj2qLeBv8 LFR5cgzn04HCVx5ISqUiL4SfhnrEcBDtOEQF4bMh3I6swOMKumLi/kj++USdwtA42a3j 8OOg== Received: by 10.216.227.167 with SMTP id d39mr109606weq.88.1350672651501; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:50:51 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.90.134 with SMTP id bw6ls4116887wib.1.canary; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.73.134 with SMTP id l6mr3088665wiv.1.1350672650825; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.73.134 with SMTP id l6mr3088664wiv.1.1350672650812; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dd17822.kasserver.com (dd17822.kasserver.com. [85.13.138.119]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b5si2152307wie.2.2012.10.19.11.50.50 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 85.13.138.119 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of me@v4hn.de) client-ip=85.13.138.119; Received: from samsa (brln-4db813a1.pool.mediaWays.net [77.184.19.161]) by dd17822.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 03C7D864DB3 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 20:50:49 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 20:50:49 +0200 From: v4hn To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] "Any" and {ro} Message-ID: <20121019185049.GO5109@samsa.fritz.box> References: <325f818f-76ce-4f3c-b0c0-03dc4db2e9d8@googlegroups.com> <503B8ED4.200@gmail.com> <9019D4E1-8993-4AF4-BD70-AC76E5A9620F@yahoo.com> <1346161778.18681.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <20120828201927.GI25027@samsa> <503D28D0.5070206@gmx.de> <20120828223338.GA26211@samsa> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="MWF3YmTHhoLNIVQC" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120828223338.GA26211@samsa> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Original-Sender: me@v4hn.de X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.13.138.119 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of me@v4hn.de) smtp.mail=me@v4hn.de 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: , X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --MWF3YmTHhoLNIVQC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable coi rodo =2Ei mi na'e pu sisti lonu pensi lonu ma'a pilno zo le .e zo lo kei .e loi preti poi pu se cusku mi gi'e se sitna =2Ei xu ma'a ba'e na nitcu loi cmavo be zo le bei lonu ka'e jarco lodu'u lo cusku ku pensi lo se steci gi'ikau na'e pensi lo se steci mu'o mi'e la .van. On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:33:39AM +0200, v4hn wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:23:44PM +0200, selpa'i wrote: > > Am 28.08.2012 22:19, schrieb v4hn: > > >Why should people stop to use {le} if it literally means "the > > >thing you have in mind".. mu'o > >=20 > > Because it doesn't mean that any more than "lo" does. Both are > > defined in terms of "zo'e", so "lo" is just as specific as "le", and > > "le" can be just as vague as "lo". There isn't anything that "le" > > does that "lo" cannot do. >=20 > If you read more of the gadri proposal than just the formal > definitions, then you find that {lo} is described as "generic article" > whereas {le} gets quite a bit of attention as well and is described as > "specific article". This proposal does not make any "specific" usage of > {le} deprecated as far as I can see. >=20 > The distinction made in the proposal looks to me like > the core of the "any" vs "specific ones" discussion. >=20 > You're right in that this generic/specific distinction does not > seem to exist in the given formal definitions. > Is this intensional? What's the point in describing in two pages > two different concepts for {le} and {lo} if you afterwards define > both in terms of {zo'e} without mentioning the generic/specific distincti= on? >=20 >=20 > mu'o mi'e la .van. --MWF3YmTHhoLNIVQC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlCBoQgACgkQMBKLZs4+wjwSswCfWaIp1npesXYa0qhGYvpZa98R 9iwAoL4d66m3HejsnYVAUb/xQxBnx1ob =FTxk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --MWF3YmTHhoLNIVQC--