From sentto-44114-15104-1029502441-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Fri Aug 16 05:54:35 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 16 Aug 2002 05:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n40.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.108]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17fgcb-0000AX-00 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 05:54:33 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-15104-1029502441-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.98] by n40.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 Aug 2002 12:54:02 -0000 X-Sender: jcowan@reutershealth.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 16 Aug 2002 12:54:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 65947 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2002 12:54:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 16 Aug 2002 12:54:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail2.reutershealth.com) (65.246.141.151) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 2002 12:54:01 -0000 Received: from skunk.reutershealth.com (IDENT:cowan@[10.65.117.21]) by mail2.reutershealth.com (Pro-8.9.3/Pro-8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA15688; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 09:04:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200208161304.JAA15688@mail2.reutershealth.com> Received: by skunk.reutershealth.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 16 Aug 2002 08:51:09 -0400 To: Philip.Newton@datenrevision.de (Newton, Philip) Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com ('lojban@yahoogroups.com') In-Reply-To: from "Newton, Philip" at Aug 16, 2002 02:42:00 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] From: John Cowan X-Yahoo-Profile: john_w_cowan MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 08:51:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [lojban] Phrases for language learners Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 634 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jcowan@reutershealth.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Newton, Philip scripsit: > Maybe I'll think about it a bit more, but it seems to me at the moment that > lo'u...le'u is more general (and perhaps more useful especially in such > asking-about-language-and-usage contexts) than lu...li'u. For human interlocutors, it makes little difference which one you use. The main benefit of the distinction between lu/li'u and lo'u/le'u is for machines, who can infer from la simon. cusku lu la djefris. mlatu li'u that Simon asserted *that* Jeffry is a cat, whereas from la simon. cusku lo'u la djefris. mlatu le'u they can only infer that Simon said something or other. -- John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com "The competent programmer is fully aware of the strictly limited size of his own skull; therefore he approaches the programming task in full humility, and among other things he avoids clever tricks like the plague." --Edsger Dijkstra ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/RN.GAA/GSaulB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/