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 m0qSpqt-000023C; Tue, 26 Jul 94 19:59 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2123; Tue, 26 Jul 94 19:58:18 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2120; Tue, 26 Jul 1994 19:58:18 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8401; Tue, 26 Jul 1994 18:57:21 +0200 Date: Tue, 26 Jul 1994 12:43:08 EDT Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: Response to Randall Holmes on Loglan/Lojban "me" To: holmes@diamond.idbsu.edu, lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Content-Length: 1270 Lines: 37 > The construction Jorge describes (du lu'a ) sounds as if it > might work, if it is indeed the case that lu'a means "the > set of the things designated by ". I assume du means "is a > member of set..." Again, I do not know Lojban vocabulary. No, lu'a means "an individual of the set/mass/individuals of ". du means "is equal to" lu'i is "the set of things designated by " > > If so, you have it! In TLI Loglan, using my sense of ME (which I > think is now official) the derivation goes in the other direction. > To say "the set of the men I have in mind" one must first construct > the predicate "me le mrenu", then use "lea", which constructs sets > from predicates but cannot construct them from arguments, to build > "lea me le mrenu". "Lea me le mrenu" would be {lu'i le nanmu} in Lojban. The predicate "me le mrenu" would be {du lu'a le nanmu}. > Either approach is OK; if one can construct the set of multiple > designata of an argument, one can construct the predicate applying to > them, and vice versa. > > Someone else will need to tell me whether Jorge's Lojban is correct. Indeed. I wouldn't trust it myself :) > > --Randall Holmes > Jorge