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 m0rEkD6-00007GC; Mon, 5 Dec 94 22:40 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8905; Mon, 05 Dec 94 22:40:49 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 8902; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 22:40:43 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9082; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 21:37:15 +0100 Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 15:33:01 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: diversity X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199411270226.AA20250@nfs2.digex.net> from "ucleaar" at Nov 27, 94 02:25:31 am Content-Length: 861 Lines: 22 la .and. cusku di'e > > > (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 given possible alpha-conversion to get rid of conflict with any other "da". -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.