From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Mar 20 04:36:10 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 20 Mar 2006 04:36:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FLJbo-0001rS-Gh for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 04:35:41 -0800 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.194]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FLJbb-0001rE-EV for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 04:35:39 -0800 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i20so676559wra for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 04:35:26 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=djdRLKTySWFi+Yu8SSfuTHvrNfzBFQb4WXJ/n8itRB/lvJh6P32bWLFunJGw7ov6rf8xvb4X9+e5GwThLjJjqlv56BkNn0UrtCAGpUhJSdvQw2QH1nhU6ogyNJCYuB8QlTo660FKBJyNG6z1EAIt7kgqVi2PArLkpUvBn1DWxB8= Received: by 10.54.113.16 with SMTP id l16mr3326680wrc; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 04:35:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.54.67.10 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 04:35:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d17560603200435j11ca8350ie6cd5fda599d2be4@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:35:26 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: semantic primes In-Reply-To: <20060318182322.22083.qmail@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <925d17560603180823m5e01a1celc0e7beacde4aea08@mail.gmail.com> <20060318182322.22083.qmail@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 11173 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 3/18/06, John E Clifford wrote: > Maybe we can assume that the > frame of reference is always a person looking > some way and collapse the whole to the person (as > you seem to suggest) and assume he is looking the > way he in fact is, Why do you need to assume that? Isn't a person always looking the way they in fact are? > but that seems to me to miss a > lot of cases. How are they to be expressed? Which case does it miss? mu'o mi'e xorxes To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.