Return-Path: <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN>
Message-Id: <9204030322.AA00502@relay1.UU.NET>
Date: Thu Apr  2 23:51:50 1992
Reply-To: Undetermined origin c/o Postmaster <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.Princeton.EDU!POSTMASTER>
Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.Princeton.EDU!LOJBAN>
Comments:     <Parser> W: Invalid RFC822 field -- "(5.64+1.3.1+0.50); id
              AA21930 Fri, 3 Apr 1992 09:". Rest of header flushed.
Comments:     <Parser> E: "From:"/"Sender:" field is missing.
From: Undetermined origin c/o Postmaster <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.Princeton.EDU!POSTMASTER>
To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>,
        Eric Raymond <eric@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>,
        Eric Tiedemann <est@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Thu Apr  2 23:51:50 1992
X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN

And:
[re: loi remna cu morsi]
>If lo'i remna is neither male nor female, then this looks like the
>candidate for "Man is immortal".
>If loi remna is both male and female (& I reckon this is so), then this
>is rather iffy for "Man is mortal". "Man is mortal" means the typical person
>('man', to be safe) is mortal. But "loi remna is mortal" means that at least
>some part of loi remna, *but possibly only a single person* is mortal.

Ah, but {morsi} doesn't mean "mortal". It means "dead". At least some part
of loi remna, but possibly only a single person, was/is/will be dead. Let's
accept that {lo ca morsi} is exclusive of {lo ca remna}. In that case, the
proper phrase is {loi remna ba morsi}: in fact, the proper phrase is {ro
remna ba morsi}. But as for "Man is immortal", {loi remna roroi na'e morsi}:
at all times, at least part of the mass of loi remna is not already dead.

Having just endured three lectures on adjuncts vs. complements in Syntax,
I remember our discussion here on whether BAI phrases are still there after
you shut the fridge door, and I am endlessly amused :)

Nick.