From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Fri May 26 21:58:58 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3113 ; Fri, 26 May 95 21:58:56 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Fri, 26 May 95 03:23:47 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa09908; 26 May 95 4:23 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1412; Thu, 25 May 95 23:00:56 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0193; Thu, 25 May 1995 23:00:56 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 23:02:08 -0400 Reply-To: "Dylan P. Thurston" Sender: Lojban list From: "Dylan P. Thurston" Subject: Re: [forwarded message] X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander In-Reply-To: <01HQX28JOUEQBHLS0U@NETOP6.HARVARD.EDU> Message-ID: <9505260423.aa09908@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R > la stivn. belnap. cusku di'e > > No ones skin is Platonic ideal blue, but is blue to a degree. Its seems > > artificial to specify that something is 89% blue. A fuzzy means of > > describing the degree of blueness would be most interesting. Has anyone > > thought about this? la djan. cusku di'e > That is supposed to be "le jei le skapi be ko'a cu blanu", the degree-of-truth > of someone's skin being blue. I would just use {le ka blanu} where appropriate. > As far as "ni" goes, I'm as much at sea as > anyone. Does anyone understand {ni}? Is it necessary? It seems like it would be appropriate in "Mary is more of a lover than John", but no-one seems to have a problem with ka: la meris. zmadu la djan. le ka prami Does {ni} ever have a use not covered by either {jei} or {ka}? (With Jorge's uses of {kau}, you could even specify the point of comparison precisely, as long as {xokau} appears exactly once following the {ka}.) > -- > John Cowan cowan@ccil.org > e'osai ko sarji la lojban. mu'o mi'e. dilyn. turstan.