Date: Sun, 4 Dec 1994 16:30:20 -0500
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab>
Message-Id: <199412042130.AA15075@access4.digex.net>
Subject: Re: (1) loi; (2) le v. la
Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net, lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Sun Dec  4 16:30:26 1994
X-From-Space-Address: lojbab

>Perhaps I am biased by English, since, so far as I am aware, everything
>in English is +veridical. Consequently I may lack the appropriate
>intuitions about -veridical.

English is certainly NOT veridical.  Among other things, we use metonymy
heavily, and metonymy is inconsistent with veridicality.  "The White House
announced a new policy last night."  Houses do not announce.  And is the
policy really "new"?   Then there is the classic JCB example of ""le"
"That man is really a woman".  "That man" cannot be veridical if the statement
is true.

lojbab