Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id BAA17046 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:22:06 -0500 Message-Id: <199511170622.BAA17046@locke.ccil.org> Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BBC8972F ; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 2:13:22 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:46:09 -0500 Reply-To: Jorge Llambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: TECH: lambda and "ka" revisited X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu To: John Cowan Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Fri Nov 17 01:22:09 1995 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU la kris cusku di'e > mi djuno ledu'u le tsali cu blanu > I know that the sky is blue > mi djuno lejei le tsali cu blanu > I know whether or not the sky is blue > mi djuno leni le tsali cu blanu > I know how true it is that the sky is blue --> how blue the sky is > > I stopped doing this because xorxes convinced me it was wrong; but let's > define it that way, shall we? I wouldn't be against defining them that way ({jei} is already that de facto if not de jure anyway), but I would prefer to forget about {ni} and {jei} altogether. (That definition of {ni} would clash severely with usage though.) Jorge