Received: from mail-lb0-f190.google.com ([209.85.217.190]:47531) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UqrQu-0006ko-OK for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:57 -0700 Received: by mail-lb0-f190.google.com with SMTP id w20sf61845lbh.7 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from: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=lRU6kOxOZ02vuAb0AOjJaWdv8RbcBEmpWCt2gVJ4lYY=; b=JO2csvD/ZHl0QFSEzWctiqaja9R+gtXpH8PVbgEn6IC2s4Chy0P5Q+KXT/bpq61cD+ D+T+ENb9lbTjl2KRzGqbJe5OOcLQ3rtKZGXq4J/ZWYl67nZd6AhIJ6evlDneHXPAydOF wlEEZudHHOzonNswCeosgPtd1OzqBBeGakviuFpIznTMpPxMzSzyfhGAl20+Ce8yYzQo F6syUrbp9+A23hFYrU+L4QNznuOJLcfVaG+VJMH53YTbtF0R7IC/NMd9IpFfOir63lon 6V0qiaEx6eTOus1488Erq4pFXxKHWGUPvtBaVzrt8LlruhGRtV/O0mM+2BYsykxS0su2 QZww== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from: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=lRU6kOxOZ02vuAb0AOjJaWdv8RbcBEmpWCt2gVJ4lYY=; b=o/TnIV1bx3tAn17hvuNEiDHiD2GN1Un1m2KtOlzniIp+E5kFTY6krVobRE7vO9dTnR XvWcXlfEOvRLYEeXX6UDSI3F5hrbkwGJBbFzFDuDMb9Y6KUEAJ9+A8tomThJ/EyUC9C0 Pmn8zgt5Q33BzlOoBJTrSejfmRwogK8N7qm+7Ee1fn0+Dv0c8G/3s4Q/tRsJc5hMRNrB OmYjPHRZvemRIk5JDzTYVDXMNkYo7KwAxDN+pkdscouBcPxulFJ7btc5iWjNOnwV50ue b5kWl5xE2jJbc6hKM+yQij4tET+a2GiNQ9CAzPL+JF+vtXDW9lFyJAAcbvoY5Tlslkwv dCCg== X-Received: by 10.180.182.50 with SMTP id eb18mr193652wic.5.1372021360719; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:40 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.35.38 with SMTP id e6ls716931wij.9.canary; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.204.230.12 with SMTP id jk12mr148099bkb.8.1372021360067; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22c.google.com (mail-la0-x22c.google.com [2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ev8si460577bkc.1.2013.06.23.14.02.39 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:40 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c; Received: by mail-la0-f44.google.com with SMTP id er20so9583161lab.17 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.5.97 with SMTP id r1mr11423195lbr.76.1372021359709; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.29.10 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:02:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2d346b25-b744-4f11-9fcb-65211de46c48@googlegroups.com> References: <5d7f238f-ff93-40ab-af24-fc6320d91b23@googlegroups.com> <199f9de9-f0bb-4cbb-bd8e-e124b45d5d1d@googlegroups.com> <20130623121840.GI32044@samsa.fritz.box> <2d346b25-b744-4f11-9fcb-65211de46c48@googlegroups.com> Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 15:02:39 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Please, the best explanation of {le} vs. {lo} From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com 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: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae94ee033c5143e04dfd89deb X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --14dae94ee033c5143e04dfd89deb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:41 AM, =E1=CE=C1=D4=CF=CC=C9=CA =E7=C1=DB=C5=D7 <= volishavas@gmail.com>wrote: > Using here {le nanmu} is not better and actually it might be wrong. Cuz i= t > may be that I just now saw a woman, which I described as a man and I thin= k > the person is a man. > He/she has not any specific meaning for me at all that is why I called > him/her {lo nanmu}, but not {le ninmu}. > Please, everybody, read xorlo-update already cuz the {lo}-meaning has > changed dramatically since CLL, which is dated by 1997. > Lookup the meaning of the word "veridical". {lo} is and /always has been/ veridical- it must and can only be used for things which /actually are/ what you're describing them as. {le} is and /always has been/ non-veridical= . xorlo did not change the meaning of {lo} or {le}, it just changed how quantification works. > =D7=CF=D3=CB=D2=C5=D3=C5=CE=D8=C5, 23 =C9=C0=CE=D1 2013 =C7., 18:18:40 UT= C+6 =D0=CF=CC=D8=DA=CF=D7=C1=D4=C5=CC=D8 v4hn =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=CC: > >> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 03:21:50AM -0700, =E1=CE=C1=D4=CF=CC=C9=CA =E7= =C1=DB=C5=D7 wrote: >> > I may call a woman with {lo nanmu} if I think the person is a man. >> > You can ask about that almost anybody, especially la tsani or la >> selpa'i. >> > And they can say am I right or not. >> >> Yes, you can do that. Obviously. How else would you describe someone >> who seems to be a man? >> >> Nevertheless, you say something ba'e wrong then. >> Using {le nanmu} (which in my opinion is better style anyway when you >> have someone specific in mind) you do not, because you refer to >> a specific individual no matter the description. >> >> >> v4hn >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "lojban" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > --=20 mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --14dae94ee033c5143e04dfd89deb Content-Type: text/html; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:41 AM, =E1=CE=C1=D4=CF= =CC=C9=CA =E7=C1=DB=C5=D7 <volishavas@gmail.com> wrote:
Using here {le nanmu} is not better and actually it might be wrong. Cuz it = may be that I just now saw a woman, which I described as a man and I think = the person is a man.
He/she has not any specific meaning for me at all t= hat is why I called him/her {lo nanmu}, but not {le ninmu}.
Please, everybody, read xorlo-update already cuz the {lo}-meaning has chang= ed dramatically since CLL, which is dated by 1997.
Lookup the meaning of the word "veridical". {lo} is and /always = has been/ veridical- it must and can only be used for things which /actuall= y are/ what you're describing them as. {le} is and /always has been/ no= n-veridical.

xorlo did not change the meaning of {lo} or {le}, it just changed how q= uantification works.
=9A
=D7=CF=D3= =CB=D2=C5=D3=C5=CE=D8=C5, 23 =C9=C0=CE=D1 2013=9A=C7., 18:18:40 UTC+6 =D0= =CF=CC=D8=DA=CF=D7=C1=D4=C5=CC=D8 v4hn =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=CC:
On Sun, Jun 23, 2= 013 at 03:21:50AM -0700, =E1=CE=C1=D4=CF=CC=C9=CA =E7=C1=DB=C5=D7 wrote:
> I may call a woman with {lo nanmu} if I think the person is a man.
> You can ask about that almost anybody, especially la tsani or la s= elpa'i.=20
> And they can say am I right or not.

Yes, you can do that. Obviously. How else would you describe someone
who seems to be a man?

Nevertheless, you say something ba'e wrong then.
Using {le nanmu} (which in my opinion is better style anyway when you
have someone specific in mind) you do not, because you refer to
a specific individual no matter the description.


v4hn

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
=9A
=9A



--
mu'o mi= 'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.l= uk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. = :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http:= //groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
--14dae94ee033c5143e04dfd89deb--