From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun May 07 19:41:10 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 07 May 2006 19:41:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fcvg3-0007Kp-0t for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 19:40:51 -0700 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.232]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fcvg0-0007Ki-N5 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 07 May 2006 19:40:50 -0700 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i34so873020wra for ; Sun, 07 May 2006 19:40:47 -0700 (PDT) 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=skmiuvZhMefHgptZgAX6nMo/VGOb25ZAPqhze1IBgWrytIx08xBbUvSLA2/Vnqfh+y700Au0I38bAMu+NLHESgIAAAatMxdBljum49bNQTUB7jCS2y11igaIAi0WLr02frLwScb7//RV29/dwDCStSII7T2YHaRhpIYRF808Qp0= Received: by 10.65.218.14 with SMTP id v14mr713521qbq; Sun, 07 May 2006 19:40:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.218.2 with HTTP; Sun, 7 May 2006 19:40:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 20:40:47 -0600 From: "Maxim Katcharov" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: More {lo}/{le} questions In-Reply-To: <968279771.20060508075610@mail.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <925d17560605061531j68fc5d28h65b798fa9eda5703@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560605061852y63ba2990lb04dc252f3eb6f0f@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560605070758u5e187557u331c39056f29fe51@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560605071522j4dd115e3o926fefd677799e53@mail.gmail.com> <968279771.20060508075610@mail.ru> X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 11432 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: maxim.katcharov@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list You'll have to excuse me if my response reeks of my position regarding le and lo, as expressed the other thread : ) On 5/7/06, Yanis Batura wrote: > > > coi ro lojbo darlu la lojban. banli > > > > > 1) Couldn't the difference between {lo} and {le} be expressed like this: > > {le} indicates that the meaning of the sumti depends on the context [of the > speaker, of conversation / situation etc.] > > {lo} indicates that the meaning of the sumti does not depend on the context > (is universal, applicable to every context) > This distinction (if it is complete) seems to match what I've said regarding {le} and {lo}: {lo} is "by universal definition", {le} is "by definition of the speaker" ("context of the speaker"). I'd say that "context of the conversation" basically boils down to the "context of the speaker". Perhaps they (those conversing) are using an improvised definition for bear ("black bears only" or whatever), and both understand it. {le} basically acknowledges that you might not be using the standard definition. I'd prefer the use of the word 'definition' instead of 'context': {le} indicates that the meaning of the sumti depends on the definition [of the speaker, of conversation / situation etc.] {lo} indicates that the meaning of the sumti does not depend on the definition [of the speaker, of conversation / situation etc.] (is a universal definition, applicable to every context) > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > 2) Isn't {da} an inconcrete version of {lo}, and {zo'e} - of {le}? > In what way? I wouldn't say so, though they seem oddly similar. {da} refers to some referant, be it of {lo} or {le}. {zo'e} simply says "there's something here that makes this bridi true", so it seems that there is some referant out there, though we definitely don't care about it. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > 3) Are there ways to express this elusive difference (between {lo} and {le} > sumti) for selbri? > > Example: > > fagri > > Fire! > > It means that the speaker is seeing or however experiencing the event of > fire burning on some fuel in the air, i. e. it is the fire the speaker has > in mind, so this selbri is more to the {le-} than to the {lo-} (I hope you By context it probably means that they're seeing it, but really it just means: (lo su'ono ?) cu fagri (lo su'ono ?) (lo su'ono ?) (I don't want to get into a prenex) The question marks represent a gismu that means nothing, basically: (figure out what I'm referring to by context) cu fagri (figure out by context) (figure out by context) > understand me). Is there any way to say the same but with universal meaning, > like "Exists!" in the philosophical sense? > zasti? What do you mean? 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.