From jcowan@reutershealth.com Fri Feb 28 07:17:44 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 28 Feb 2003 07:17:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [65.246.141.36] (helo=mail.reutershealth.com) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18omGO-0006kG-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 07:17:28 -0800 Received: from skunk.reutershealth.com (mail [65.246.141.36]) by mail.reutershealth.com (Pro-8.9.3/Pro-8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA11810; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:14:32 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200302281514.KAA11810@mail.reutershealth.com> Received: by skunk.reutershealth.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:17:24 -0500 From: John Cowan Subject: [lojban] Re: Any (was: Nick will be with you shortly) To: mbays@freeshell.org Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:17:24 -0500 (EST) Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: from "Martin Bays" at Feb 28, 2003 03:12:50 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 4217 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 Martin Bays scripsit: > Oh dear. If I've understood your meaning of "any" correctly - you need a > doctor, and what's more you need a doctor precisely because of its > doctorishness, and don't care about specific identity or other properties > - then this is precisely the kind of circumstance in which I'd use lo'e. > I need "the typical" doctor - I need "the result of squinting over the set > of all things which doctor". > > I'm guessing that's wrong. Anyone feel like explaining why? Because "lo'e mikce" is an abstraction bearing only the typical features of doctors. As Woldy says, the typical lion is neither male nor female, though all actual lions are one or the other. If you want lo'e mikce, you will not get much doctoring from it. -- John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Most languages are dramatically underdescribed, and at least one is dramatically overdescribed. Still other languages are simultaneously overdescribed and underdescribed. Welsh pertains to the third category. --Alan King