Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c03::235 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c03::235;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMKwHj3hLX1mP-19-L2EExwt=ATx08KJUBWrA5Om+USOpdY6CA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e7d449eb-3494-4ffa-a469-3145135f6f96@googlegroups.com>
	<CALm==BWNQg8g6+nGS2Tr1o5LhYB=3PYFihar-jeb5gQhP4Hd=Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<5d7f238f-ff93-40ab-af24-fc6320d91b23@googlegroups.com>
	<CAMKwHj1rHGmv_ZA6q5N5_sLgOS+pTLDFEdXxhDHt3yZ8tJJu3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<c881bb54-556a-4507-8a69-5d9836d4590c@googlegroups.com>
	<CAMKwHj1yae-EHEi7txVG61nGtHwD_vP9br4R2RQ64+ZBOMtZ1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<199f9de9-f0bb-4cbb-bd8e-e124b45d5d1d@googlegroups.com>
	<CAMKwHj0YPQvyZKPT83NMYG_mmpNNy=j0HVdjeQm6P22jwrzNug@mail.gmail.com>
	<d8fa0d25-ba5a-4d6f-aad9-6f5733c05c7e@googlegroups.com>
	<20130623121840.GI32044@samsa.fritz.box>
	<2d346b25-b744-4f11-9fcb-65211de46c48@googlegroups.com>
	<CAMKwHj3hLX1mP-19-L2EExwt=ATx08KJUBWrA5Om+USOpdY6CA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 04:36:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+gZtgJvR6tRnigHk7YGBeHzm-WZEiW+YGLicOvnccLm-a_FCA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Please, the best explanation of {le} vs. {lo}
From: Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c64b0f09d9204dfe24f9b
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

--089e013c64b0f09d9204dfe24f9b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:41 AM, =D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=BE=D0=BB=D0=
=B8=D0=B9 =D0=93=D0=B0=D1=88=D0=B5=D0=B2 <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 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-veridic=
al.
>
> xorlo did not change the meaning of {lo} or {le}, it just changed how
> quantification works.
>
xorlo did actually change the meaning of {lo}. There was no {zo'e} in
old-lo, there is in xorlo, this is a pretty dramatic difference.

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

--=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.


--089e013c64b0f09d9204dfe24f9b
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jonathan Jones <span dir=
=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:eyeonus@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">eyeonus=
@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote">
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"im"=
>On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:41 AM, =D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=BE=D0=BB=D0=
=B8=D0=B9 =D0=93=D0=B0=D1=88=D0=B5=D0=B2 <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"m=
ailto:volishavas@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">volishavas@gmail.com</a>&gt;<=
/span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
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.<br>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}.<br>

Please, everybody, read xorlo-update already cuz the {lo}-meaning has chang=
ed dramatically since CLL, which is dated by 1997.<br></blockquote></div><d=
iv><br>Lookup the meaning of the word &quot;veridical&quot;. {lo} is and /a=
lways has been/ veridical- it must and can only be used for things which /a=
ctually are/ what you&#39;re describing them as. {le} is and /always has be=
en/ non-veridical.<br>

<br>xorlo did not change the meaning of {lo} or {le}, it just changed how q=
uantification works.<br></div></div></blockquote><div style>xorlo did actua=
lly change the meaning of {lo}. There was no {zo&#39;e} in old-lo, there is=
 in xorlo, this is a pretty dramatic difference.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>mi&#39;e la latro&#39;a mu&#39;o</div></div=
><br></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--089e013c64b0f09d9204dfe24f9b--