From wb3ffv!mimsy!uunet.UUCP!dsinc.dsi.com!CUVMA.BITNET!LISTSERV Wed Oct  2 21:17:58 1991
Message-Id: <9110021255.AA06844@relay1.UU.NET>
Date: Wed Oct 2 21:17:58 1991
Reply-To: "61510::GILSON"
 <uunet!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!gilson%61510.decnet%CCF1.NRL.NAVY.MIL>
Sender: Lojban list <uunet!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!LOJBAN%CUVMA.BITNET>
From: "61510::GILSON"
 <uunet!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!gilson%61510.decnet%CCF1.NRL.NAVY.MIL>
Subject:      "Only" and its synonyms
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>,
        Eric Raymond <eric@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>,
        Eric Tiedemann <est@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
Status: RO

Richard Kennaway (jrk%INFORMATION-SYSTEMS.EAST-ANGLIA.AC.UK@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU)
 writes:


>"Only" seems to me to be a three-place predicate masquerading as a
>two-place one.  "X is only Y" means "X is Y and, perhaps contrary to
>expectation, is not Z", where Z is left unstated.

>The same applies to the near-synonyms "really", "essentially", "nothing
>but", "basically", "at bottom", "simply", "purely", "no more than" etc.

I think he has really hit the essence of the problem. I do not think anyone
could put it better.

                                                Bruce