Return-Path: <@SEGATE.SUNET.SE:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi  with smtp
	(Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0sUUwZ-0000ZBC; Sat, 8 Jul 95 11:08 EET DST
Message-Id: <m0sUUwZ-0000ZBC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id 2CDC8F6F ; Sat, 8 Jul 1995 9:53:43 +0200
Date:         Sat, 8 Jul 1995 03:51:47 -0400
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      ri do re?
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 374
Lines: 9

Cowan wrote:
>It has never been settled, I don't think, whether ri/ra/ru are de dicto
>or de re:  in other words, does "lo nanmu batci ri" mean "lo nanmu batci
>vo'a" (de re) or "lo nanmu batci lo nanmu" (de dicto).  I lean toward
>the first interpretation, which is consonant with history.

Cowan and I agreed by phone that "de re" ri=vo'a in the above is correct.

lojbab