From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Sat Sep 4 00:49:56 1993 Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 3 Sep 1993 18:52:29 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 3 Sep 1993 18:52:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199309032252.AA01375@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1482; Fri, 03 Sep 93 18:50:53 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7988; Fri, 03 Sep 93 18:53:48 EDT Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1993 23:49:56 +0100 Reply-To: ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK Sender: Lojban list From: Mr Andrew Rosta Subject: Re: TECH: Mark Shoulson waiting for a taxi X-To: lojban@cuvma.BITNET To: Erik Rauch In-Reply-To: (Your message of Fri, 03 Sep 93 18:16:00 A.) <9309031719.AA95369@link-1.ts.bcc.ac.uk> Status: RO X-Status: > I think this is another case of sumti-raising. What you are really > waiting for is {lo nu klama lo karcrtaksi}. > > mi'e .i,n. True enough, but it doesn't solve the non-specificity problem, does it? If the inception of nu klama [fa?] lo karcrtaksi happens, but Mark wasn't waiting for it, the utterance could still be true, whereas we want it to be false in such a circumstance. mihelahola.Andla