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 m0r67Wo-00005bC; Sat, 12 Nov 94 03:45 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1880; Sat, 12 Nov 94 03:45:29 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 1876; Sat, 12 Nov 1994 03:45:29 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8676; Sat, 12 Nov 1994 02:42:20 +0100 Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 20:47:32 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: any X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 616 Lines: 16 la i,n cusku di'e > Not for my money. I hold that any statement of possibility should > (by default at least) mean that there are circumstances under > which the statement holds true, not that it holds true under > all conceivable circumstances. I agree that that is true for {ka'e}, but {kakne} has an x3 place for "circumstances". If this place is not filled, then it is the obvious ones from context, which may impose some restrictions. In the case of the sofa, it is obvious that there is a restriction of "at the same time", otherwise it would in general be false that only two people can sit there. Jorge