From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Thu Jun 22 23:27:15 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3529 ; Thu, 22 Jun 95 23:27:13 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Thu, 22 Jun 95 00:23:16 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa27146; 22 Jun 95 1:22 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3425; Wed, 21 Jun 95 20:20:17 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3990; Wed, 21 Jun 1995 20:19:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 14:25:13 EDT Reply-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Subject: Re: ears and legs X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506220122.aa27146@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R > Imagine two people are lost in the woods, and you have reason to believe > they might be together. You know one is wearing a bright blue garment. > You and others are looking, and you spot through the underbrush, > something bright blue and appropriately sized moving. You might yell to > the others "I see them", even though you actually have not seen any > piece of any person, but merely the garment of one of the people, and > even though you don't actually know that the second person is with the > blue-garbed one. I agree with you, but you are not addressing the issue. The issue is: can you use {re lu'a le ninmu ku joi le nanmu ku joi le verba} to refer to the man's ear and the man's leg? I think that you can't. If you are looking for the three of them that are lost in the woods, and you see the man's ear and leg, you would not say "I see two of them", meaning the ear and the leg, when "them" is the three people. Jorge