From @gate.demon.co.uk,@uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Thu Jun 08 21:50:40 1995 Received: from punt.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3309 ; Thu, 08 Jun 95 21:50:17 BST Received: from punt.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Thu, 08 Jun 95 09:41:18 GMT Received: from gate.demon.co.uk by punt.demon.co.uk id aa17355; 8 Jun 95 10:39 +0100 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by gate.demon.co.uk id aa20495; 8 Jun 95 3:17 GMT-60:00 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3948; Wed, 07 Jun 95 20:48:03 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3280; Wed, 7 Jun 1995 20:43:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 17:47:49 EDT Reply-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Subject: Re: example of si'o? X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506080317.aa20495@gate.demon.co.uk> Status: R > I saw the following on sci.lang, and suspect that it may be a useful > example of si'o, the concept abstract. I don't think we need {si'o} for this: la pat djuno le du'u makau fonxa judri la maik Pat knows Mike's telephone number. i le la maris fonxa judri cu mintu le la maik fonxa judri Mary's telephone number is the same as Mike's. That doesn't contradict: i la pat na djuno le du'u makau fonxa judri la maris Pat doesn't know Mary's telephone number. There's no need for {si'o} here. > > Use different terms for telephone numbers and concepts of telephone > > numbers. Mike's telephone number can be the same as Mary's without > > the concept of Mike's telephone number being the same as the concept > > of Mary's telephone number. We make knowledge applicable to concepts. Or rather, one doesn't "know" (djuno) a telephone number. What we are discussing is not knowing a number, but knowing whether a number belongs to someone or not. We know (djuno) facts, not objects. Jorge