Received-SPF: none (google.com: mbays@sdf.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=192.94.73.24;
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 17:52:38 -0500
From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2
Message-ID: <20141104225238.GD20353@gonzales>
References: <20141021010639.GB11705@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2c+ObFDqF_TZTQMjGJRZfZxpoY-pFB4_canWM3Lpdgvsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141022002214.GD25753@gonzales>
 <544D68A0.8000402@gmail.com>
 <20141028024248.GB6097@gonzales>
 <544FB6F3.5010301@gmail.com>
 <20141030014348.GP4023@gonzales>
 <54523459.3080700@gmail.com>
 <20141104011430.GB27496@gonzales>
 <54592B81.2050908@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <54592B81.2050908@gmail.com>
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: kinli
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
X-Original-Sender: mbays@sdf.org
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=neutral
 (google.com: mbays@sdf.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=mbays@sdf.org
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>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe>
X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -


--3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Tuesday, 2014-11-04 at 20:39 +0100 - Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com>:

>=20
> On 04/11/2014 02:14, Martin Bays wrote:
> > * Thursday, 2014-10-30 at 13:51 +0100 - Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com>:
> >> On 30/10/2014 02:43, Martin Bays wrote:
> >> What's wrong with {broda xoi ke'a rapli li no} =E2=86=92 {lo nu broda =
cu rapli
> >> li no}?
> > If {broda xoi ke'a rapli li no} is taken to mean {da fasnu gi'e nu broda
> > kei gi'e rapli li no}, then we have something of a contradiction
> > - surely no da ge rapli li no gi fasnu?
> Agreed. Then, {brode xoi ke'a brodo} is probably better rendered as {da=
=20
> fasnu gi'e nu brodo fa lo su'u brode}.

i.e. just {lo su'u brode kei brodo}? So {xoi} as essentially an
afterthought version of {lo nu}? I suppose that could also be handy.
I have no idea whether this was the intended meaning of {xoi}

> For example, {broda naku} =E2=86=92 {da fasnu gi'e nu narfau fa lo nu bro=
da},=20

I don't think these are quite equivalent, though. {mi do ca ku tavla
naku} is false, but {ca ku lo nu mi do tavlu cu na fasnu} isn't
obviously false - there are events of me talking to you which aren't
currently occuring, and they could be among the referents of the {lo nu}
phrase.

Martin

--3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlRZWLYACgkQULC7OLX7LNZiUwCgzxBiH7xlWYCFj16gmMsQ6r4Q
CyYAnRJi1XVFpvwYuYGCowZNQtZfyEwK
=wdlV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--3Gf/FFewwPeBMqCJ--