Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0pr0WD-00005NC; Wed, 13 Apr 94 11:41 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6653; Wed, 13 Apr 94 11:42:00 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6648; Wed, 13 Apr 1994 11:41:59 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7644; Wed, 13 Apr 1994 10:40:32 +0200 Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 09:39:28 +0100 Reply-To: Colin Fine Sender: Lojban list From: Colin Fine Subject: Re: Once again... To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 814 Lines: 27 Jorge: ++++> Again, I believe MOIs don't do MEXs. I like {za'upamoi nu mi tcidu}, but if we want to get picky, the claim is not exactly the same, because I'm not claiming that I'm reading, but rather that something is an event of my reading. >++++++ Sorry, wasn't thinking. Does za'upa mean 'one more'? I would have taken it to mean 'more than one', parallel with su'opa. We really do need the grammar of generalised PA to be tied down We talked about it at Bradford Lojfest, but not very conclusively). I agree that if you want to be picky they are different, but I am always pleased when somebody uses a na'o lojbo pe'i expression like observative NU. Interesting question: xu ro bu'a zo'u go bu'a gi nu bu'a If so then the truth values are the same and the difference is purely pragmatic. Colin