Received: from mail-wg0-f62.google.com ([74.125.82.62]:58033)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncBDUNF3UDXIJBBDVCSOEQKGQEQQ5CI3A@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1U89pQ-0007a3-Ec; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:35:37 -0800
Received: by mail-wg0-f62.google.com with SMTP id dr1sf2499014wgb.27
        for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:35:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received:received-spf:date:from
         :to:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition
         :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=ZmyKo1vSvY1vhnVx8CHRuPBF96Qrnx1H6x4aPhO0GlA=;
        b=C3xF8bBteDmcbgg/KGeZTwKGLcuTPb25m4XG1pEVfwy4FqgNG76qoke1GwWBC35f/G
         kCwviu4oPuCqaOueMDgEzscqPIuy5jZGMlFH25NEHvCCR1e+5JdiAztAjsRfmv2g4Gur
         xyTtkPCfgm9EzuAM70gddIbcTaOZqtoebRMZvsFhHdc3VfKJKnuaMUS731g8VUhWrzgO
         b6DtGYFX4+rvnFB6hA5kQecS67WgZs2eVXLrkih7mXgnBek2nACk4hHxHF7Z1YP3AJW+
         6ry8wNMOikemJ07A+MC2rxh3GDHQ1Gz5jMmVd3IZUhYuA50BnKRCSebCDRXsU+z0i9pX
         nyGA==
X-Received: by 10.180.84.195 with SMTP id b3mr2049652wiz.13.1361367312206;
        Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:35:12 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.180.19.226 with SMTP id i2ls1275952wie.34.gmail; Wed, 20 Feb
 2013 05:35:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.14.177.72 with SMTP id c48mr21211443eem.5.1361367308684;
        Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:35:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.14.177.72 with SMTP id c48mr21211441eem.5.1361367308675;
        Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:35:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dd17822.kasserver.com (dd17822.kasserver.com. [85.13.138.119])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 47si5750172eeh.1.2013.02.20.05.35.08
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:35:08 -0800 (PST)
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-4dbc0581.pool.mediaWays.net [77.188.5.129])
	by dd17822.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id DD6C9860AF1
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:35:07 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:35:07 +0100
From: v4hn <me@v4hn.de>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: [lojban] {le} and {lo} ... and Keith Donnellan?
Message-ID: <20130220133507.GB3918@samsa.fritz.box>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm"
Content-Disposition: inline
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: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /


--rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

coi lo mriste

This is just a short question and I don't want to discuss
the whole topic right now, because we'll probably
have that discussion in 1-2 month with some more detailed
texts/research to talk about. I will write a term paper
on that topic.

The question is: Is there or isn't there a direct ba'e historical
connection between Keith Donnellan's paper "Reference and Definite
Descriptions" and the current usage of {le} and {lo}?


mi'e la .van. mu'o

--rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlEk0QsACgkQMBKLZs4+wjyUUACgg57bTYy8m/JteyBFFZTDm2F8
PoMAnA80B9rQRZ01wwGuZEjK8VuwXBFO
=FGJi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm--