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 m0rF7pb-00007GC; Tue, 6 Dec 94 23:53 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0004; Tue, 06 Dec 94 23:54:07 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0003; Tue, 6 Dec 1994 23:54:07 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2608; Tue, 6 Dec 1994 22:50:40 +0100 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 21:38:53 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: diversity X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: (Your message of Mon, 05 Dec 94 15:33:01 EST.) Content-Length: 869 Lines: 22 John: > > > > (I am in favour of a kind of opacity marker that means "the following > > > > sumti can't be exported to the prenex out of the abstraction containing > > > > the bridi the sumti is sumti of".) > > > > > > That's {tu'a}. It already exists. > > > > I mean a marker like $$$$ in "mi djica lo nu mi citka $$$$ lo plise" > > where $$$$ rules out "da poi plise zohu mi djica lo nu mi citka da". > > At present, I think, the zohu-form is not ruled out. > > No, it is ruled out. Every da variable is attached to the innermost possible > prenex, that is to say, to the innermost bridi. Your example must mean: > > mi djica lo no da poi plise zo'u mi citka da I realize this. But saying the above does not rule out the hearer inferring a proposition compatible with "da poi plise zohu mi djica lo nu mi citka da". "xahanai" would rule this out. --- And