From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri May 05 05:57:48 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 05 May 2006 05:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fbzs8-0008E2-0M for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 05:57:28 -0700 Received: from web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.122]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fbzs5-0008Du-Sk for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 05:57:27 -0700 Received: (qmail 6759 invoked by uid 60001); 5 May 2006 12:57:24 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=mmA2z8nYBvTXlyoIYh9A8ZyMCju2hjZF4tlyzJqAwrjuF90Q1dj72Yinx9Rmr3/5UfI3bU/skQv7daNTm2GaKYuyRJRG9L4fM94/DEFDlcVIMqA+BjFOQ6FFJ4gU9XkJ9t2OsDz/2Jtuy2gNBwKMun3f5o/pzJCwCbCMCq8fD/8= ; Message-ID: <20060505125724.6757.qmail@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [70.230.152.10] by web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 05 May 2006 05:57:24 PDT Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 05:57:24 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: Usage of lo and le To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-archive-position: 11387 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 --- Maxim Katcharov wrote: > On 5/4/06, John E Clifford > wrote: > > This is a little like comparing apples and > > unicorns: {lo'e} is logically a very > different > > kind of thing from {le} -- or {lo}. It is a > > simple way to state a fairly complex claim > about > > a class of things (compare "the average" and > the > > like in English); it is not about particular > > whatsises either specifically or in general. > Or, > > if it is, it is so by some other means than > > referentially. > > yep, my bad. Misunderstood how lo'e was used. > > > --- Maxim Katcharov > > > wrote: > > > > > On 5/4/06, Jorge Llambías > > > wrote: > > > > On 5/4/06, Maxim Katcharov > > > wrote: > > > > > What does it mean to have the > > > > > bear "in mind"? Is it opposed to, say, > "any > > > bear", or "bears in > > > > > general", or "bearness", or "all bears > > > typically"? > > > > > > > > Yes. (Except for "bearness", because lo > cribe > > > has to be something > > > > that does cribe, and bearness doesn't.) > > > [...] > > > > > I would like to have what "in mind" > means > > > explained. > > > > > > > > I think {le} indeed serves to preclude > the > > > "any" or "in general" > > > > interpretation that {lo} does not > preclude. > > > > > > So... is it then impossible to use {lo'e} > in > > > conjunction with "le"? If > > > it is possible, then what do you mean by > {le} > > > serving to preclude the > > > "any" or "in general" interpretations? > > So we have lo, which could mean any of the > following: > lo'e - the typical > le - not the typical, but some actual concrete > (need not be existent) Not "mean" exactly, only that {lo} is permissible even when these others are. > {lo cribe cu citka lo jbari} - bear eat berry That is, whenever there is a relation claimed between a/some bear(s) and a/some berry(ies), {lo} is appropriate. > {lo'e cribe cu citka lo jbari} - bears eat > berries (the typical bear > eats berries) Or even (and logically somewhat clearer) "Bears typically eat berries" (Lojban doesn't have "typically" -- nor "generally" nor "specifically" nor dozens of other adverbs of this sort -- in a truly useful form (as modals, probably). In many cases it does not even have predicates to use (inappropriately) to form tanru. (You can sorta do generality and specificity with {su'a}, but against some apparent intentions of the creators.) > {le cribe cu citka lo jbari} - a bear ate > berries (or maybe I think > that bears will come and eat berries, whatever) I would probably say "The bear eat berry" to make (in a different way, alas) the point that {le} makes. > ...yes? Confusing. Well, it takes some getting used to (mainly {le}) and enough people have enough questions still to make a bit more (or better) discussion seem a good idea. 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.