From sentto-44114-16224-1033313643-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Sep 29 08:37:29 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n21.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.77]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17vg8M-00046m-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:37:26 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-16224-1033313643-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.195] by n21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Sep 2002 15:34:03 -0000 X-Sender: nessus@free.fr X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 29 Sep 2002 15:34:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 16489 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2002 15:34:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Sep 2002 15:34:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr) (193.252.19.23) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Sep 2002 15:34:02 -0000 Received: from mel-rta7.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.61) by mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D760D0800DE7183; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 17:34:02 +0200 Received: from ftiq2awxk6 (80.9.199.215) by mel-rta7.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D8011E6009C95D8; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 17:34:02 +0200 Message-ID: <002601c267cf$639b2b80$d7c70950@ftiq2awxk6> To: "Lojban@Yahoogroups. Com" , "And Rosta" References: X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Lionel Vidal" X-Yahoo-Profile: cmacinf 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: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 17:45:43 +0200 Subject: [lojban] Re: sticky hypothesis Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 X-archive-position: 1712 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: nessus@free.fr Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list And: >Despite much usage to the contrary, > it is not really a way to state conditional meaning. How about if > you give an English example of what you would like to say, so we > can get an idea of what you're after? Ok. Here it is: ..... Now let's suppose the machine writes only true statements. This means that ...... It implies that.....Furthermore.... [end of the hypothesis scope, indirectly expressed in english with the following] But this is not what we're really after.... and so..... I could translate each sentences in turn, but I would like to make very clear, contrary to the english version (and to the french one from which it originates) what is the scope of the hypothesis, as the transition sentence may be omitted and replaced by just a paragraph change. xorxes: >I think you want {ru'a} not {da'i} for this. That may well be. I am not sure at all about the difference between what CLL calls an assumption (for ru'a) and an hypothesis. But as CLL tends to make {ru'a} close to {e'u}, I would rather go for {da'i} in may case. >Since {ru'acu'i} and {ru'anai} seem to be undefined, >how about: >ru'a: hypothesis >ru'acu'i: dependents of hypothesis >ru'anai: end hypothesis I like it! But would that mean I 'll have to repeat {ru'acu'i} in all bridis dependent of hypothesis? I guess yes, and that is a pain, compared to a sticky tag. mu'omi'e lioNEL ------------------------ 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/