Message-Id: <9207301237.AA03134@relay1.UU.NET>
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:51:22 -0400
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <cbmvax!uunet!grebyn.com!lojbab>
Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!pucc.princeton.edu!LOJBAN>
From: Logical Language Group <cbmvax!uunet!grebyn.com!lojbab>
Subject:      Re:  no subject heading
To: John Cowan <cowan@snark.thyrsus.com>
Status: RO

Your response on fau may be correct in that it points up that it has rather
loose and questionable semantics that may overlap other tags, but that is what
it was put int he language to mean.  "ca" seemed too specific.  I can imagine
someone writing a letter from Barcelona after the Olympics, say an article
for the newspaper, which is reporting on the Olympics.  Though the letter
is not "ca" the olympics, it is "fau" the Olympics.

I similarly think that, while most abstractions could be paraphrased as
jai BAI/FIhO constructs, the reverse is not true - the things that are
permitted to be labelled by the corresponding JAI construct are a superset of
the abstractions.  Still, it is plausible that new abstractions might
implicitly be expressed in this way, just not as clearl{y.{

lojbab