From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Mar 28 14:24:35 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:24:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44)
	id 1DG2ep-0000eE-Ez
	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:24:27 -0800
Received: from web81305.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.80])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.44)
	id 1DG2en-0000du-5e
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:24:27 -0800
Message-ID: <20050328222353.30762.qmail@web81305.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [65.69.48.37] by web81305.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:23:53 PST
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:23:53 -0800 (PST)
From: John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [lojban] Re: New to Lojban and a question
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: 6667
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
X-archive-position: 9693
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


--- Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:

> 
> There is another sense of precise which may be
> captured in English with 
> the word "narrow" or "focused" or perhaps
> "exclusive". (Exclusion of 
> alternative meanings is what increased
> verbosity in Lojban provides, in 
> theory).  I am led again to think that we may
> need a gismu for the 
> "exclusive" sense of "only" that might apply
> here.  But far be it from 
> me to propose new gismu %^)
>
I have been trying for two days to figurte out
what "the 'exclusive' sense of 'only'" might be.
I think I may have it: the importing sense based
on "exclusive disjunction" as opposed to the
sense based on "inclusive disjunction" which
allows that only so and so's are such and suches
to be true when there are no such and suches. 
Right?
But the remark also raises the usual question:
Why not use -- in a logical language -- the
logical "only"?  Why, especially, have a *brival*
(let alone a gismu) for it?