From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Mon Aug 16 13:57:52 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web41903.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.154]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BwoY4-0007oZ-NG for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:57:44 -0700 Message-ID: <20040816205714.83772.qmail@web41903.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.43.213.156] by web41903.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:57:14 PDT Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:57:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Jorge "Llambías" Subject: [lojban] Re: da poi du ro de ? To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <20040816203656.GU10911@chain.digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 8462 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > If I say: > > da poi du ro de zo'u da broda > > Is that strictly equivalent to: > > ro de zo'u de broda > > In either case, why? No. The first one says: that thing which is every thing, is a broda. Unless there is only one thing in the universe (and it brodas), then it can't be true. The second one says that everything is a broda. (Now if {da} were a plural variable, that could take more than one value at a time, they might be equivalent. But in that case we would need to define {ro} better.) mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail