Message-Id: <199407261629.AA03575@nfs1.digex.net>
Reply-To: Randall Holmes <holmes@DIAMOND.IDBSU.EDU>
Date: Tue Jul 26 12:29:44 1994
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Randall Holmes <holmes@DIAMOND.IDBSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Response to Randall Holmes on Loglan/Lojban "me"
X-To:         jorge@phyast.pitt.edu, lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@access.digex.net>
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Tue Jul 26 12:29:44 1994
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU

The construction Jorge describes (du lu'a <argument>) sounds as if it
might work, if it is indeed the case that lu'a <argument> means "the
set of the things designated by <argument>".  I assume du means "is a
member of set..."  Again, I do not know Lojban vocabulary.

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".

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.

                                --Randall Holmes