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 m0rCUy1-00007EC; Tue, 29 Nov 94 17:59 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2834; Tue, 29 Nov 94 17:59:58 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2831; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 17:59:56 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6528; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 16:56:38 +0100 Date: Mon, 28 Nov 1994 16:06:36 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: diversity X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 486 Lines: 15 > > You disagree that {lo'e} is +opaque then? > > I reckon so. For me it's a constant; there is only one lohe broda. That seems reasonable, two different points of view. Thought as a reference to brodas, I like to call it an opaque reference. Thought as a reference to something else, I agree that it's a constant, whose referent is not a broda. In either case, I find it is useful in translating what in English appear as opaque contexts, such as "I need a box". > --- > And Jorge