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;
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 15:28:57 +0200
From: v4hn <me@v4hn.de>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Please, the best explanation of {le} vs. {lo}
Message-ID: <20130623132857.GJ32044@samsa.fritz.box>
References: <e7d449eb-3494-4ffa-a469-3145135f6f96@googlegroups.com>
 <7543006.QVFjYzoatX@caracal>
 <933d80e7-2502-4e29-a9c2-2d44fad740f2@googlegroups.com>
 <CAOQ8VDWjaA5SnwWcjRUZKP+q0Z4vohQ-njmwwSu2p-VEQboFyg@mail.gmail.com>
 <aeb4566b-a673-43cc-9539-11fe29679dc2@googlegroups.com>
 <CAO7tK2ctqtZaNGPh8M+9UgGgWgZx46gsNjUBTsrTPEM8As-ejg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="NgG1H2o5aFKkgPy/"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2ctqtZaNGPh8M+9UgGgWgZx46gsNjUBTsrTPEM8As-ejg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /


--NgG1H2o5aFKkgPy/
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:39:52AM -0300, Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:15 AM, la arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com=
>wrote:
> > I guess in 99% of cases {le} denotes real objects endured in time and
> > space.
> >
> If you were to say that in Lojban, would you use "le" for "real objects
> endured in time and space"?

No, that doesn't make any sense. Does it to you?

{.i mi smadi lodu'u sitna lo vi'e tolxanri dacti kei so'a lo nu sitna sepi'=
o zo le}

Is there a better word for "denote/refer to" than {sitna}?=20

By the way: I thought I do, but I do not agree. Why not refer directly (wit=
h {le}) to
a specific kind of lion, a branch of philosophy, your favorite comic charac=
ter,
a specific emotion/state of mind...? ba'e pe'i Essentially everything that
is part of your universe of discourse (in this context: everything you can
possibly refer to at a specific moment when talking) can be refered to via =
{le},
given that your description picks out the element you refer to.
If the referent selection fails, it is inappropriate to say that though.
However, you will have a hard time to build up a situation in which it is
appropriate to refer to something that is {lo su'u prami} via {le}.


v4hn

--NgG1H2o5aFKkgPy/
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

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

iEYEARECAAYFAlHG+BkACgkQMBKLZs4+wjwDfgCdGw0ZCuLYxGA/149YgvdfI3dX
5a4An1eyqtpaIwrdM+zu8cTbpubcsvF/
=W9qP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--NgG1H2o5aFKkgPy/--