Message-Id: <MAILQUEUE2-102.931007183825.256@hylkn1.Helsinki.FI>
Message-Id: <199310071638.AA23709@kruuna.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Thu, 7 Oct 1993 12:37:43 EDT
Reply-To: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: vilva
From: Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: TECH: long, but major topic: lean lujvo and fat gismu
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Content-Length: 698
Lines: 20

> You asked about the distinction, if any, between "mi .e do klama" and
> "mi joi do klama".  The distinction is that the former is a concise way of
> making two claims, which may differ in the values of the elided places.

Understood.

> The latter makes a single claim with a single value for the elided places,
> but that value may be complex.
>
> If I go from England to France, and you from Argentina to the U.S., then
> "mi'o" may be said to have a destination of France, or the U.S., or
> France {joi} the U.S.

You can really say {mi'o klama le frasygu'e} when only one of us is going?
That's really confusing. I suppose {mi'o klama le frasygu'e joi le mergu'e}
is slightly better.


Jorge