From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Sep 11 08:20:32 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:20:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Mm7vM-00075b-2o for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:20:32 -0700 Received: from mail-yx0-f197.google.com ([209.85.210.197]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Mm7vF-000746-FS for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:20:31 -0700 Received: by yxe35 with SMTP id 35so4304204yxe.2 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8wcmt9yHonmcuniY2952K9PL35GD9MuAQoK7NGQNpks=; b=a/2D5oo6O5VaiXiKIXcRfkp14uJg07YQ0ogp2PhoMkkuaBn8j+d0P8mnBWUUEdqBqN Yc8/GFbmKdcmcyzQAwlT5baq9ZPwXyPnXlMoClsrehhZDGlQJKa2doUrO2AoJXqWH0Ff 9pu3acOYVb2gGR+R6HffUA5Gt5HClzuVEBrbg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=aS3b3TflcgjYI1auRok1fKMcHFEJWtJWZD1AIsYkCuxuVqmAOd5wBSd/YhD5LyIdAP 5gTdR5ru0cl1xlga4VA36746V0EvOspKWCmWkruc4+8CcD+V21WFF2gHc/Cvt/GkgR8x Q1XauQLchB+Q/VnfKyy4zduQCAMnRk5TBwVxw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.243.7 with SMTP id q7mr3393387anh.28.1252682419338; Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <23298cb40909110800j528aa090y2af41a204bbd7e13@mail.gmail.com> References: <23298cb40909110800j528aa090y2af41a204bbd7e13@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:20:19 -0300 Message-ID: <925d17560909110820w2044d27ct90e06f2c39677f1b@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: Logical connectives From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban-list@lojban.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 16153 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 Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Remo Dentato wrote: > > Is it correct to say that when using logical connectives like in: {mi > cutka ti .a  ta} , {ti .a ta} is a single sumti? >From a grammatical (syntactical) point of view, the connected construction functions as a single sumti, yes. >From a logical point of view, they are two sumti. "mi citka ti .a ta" is logically equivalent to "mi citka ti .ija mi citka ta". This differs from the "non-logical" sumti connectives, for which the syntax does match the logical structure. > Also, if I had abstractions {le nu ... kei .e le nu ... kei .e le nu > ... kei} are the {kei} elidable? It depends on what the "..." is. Sometimes kei will be elidable, sometimes not. 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.