From sentto-44114-16145-1033151781-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Fri Sep 27 11:39:35 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 27 Sep 2002 11:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.78]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17v01U-0003qB-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 11:39:32 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-16145-1033151781-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.194] by n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Sep 2002 18:36:22 -0000 X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 27 Sep 2002 18:36:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 53310 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2002 18:36:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 27 Sep 2002 18:36:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n23.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.79) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2002 18:36:21 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.155] by n23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Sep 2002 18:36:21 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "jjllambias2000" X-Originating-IP: 200.49.74.2 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 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, 27 Sep 2002 18:36:21 -0000 Subject: [lojban] Re: interactions between tenses, other tenses, and NA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 1633 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list la jimc cusku di'e > Perhaps the real issue is that you have to reprogram your semantic analyser > for real logic. Mapping Lojban 1-1 into an illogical natlang is going to > mangle the result, particularly where "carbon units" are most sloppy in > their logic. Defining that {lo broda na brode} has to stand for {naku lo broda cu brode} and not for {lo broda naku cu brode} is neither logical nor illogical, it's just one possible convention. You can't say that one expression is more logical than the other. Each has its own logical meaning. mu'o mi'e xorxes ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/MVfIAA/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/