From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Sat Mar  6 22:46:17 2010
Reply-To: "John E. Clifford" <pcliffje@CRL.COM>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Date: Thu Dec 21 11:55:12 1995
From: "John E. Clifford" <pcliffje@CRL.COM>
Subject:      tech:lo etc.
X-To:         lojban list <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-From-Space-Date: Thu Dec 21 11:55:12 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU
Message-ID: <GeFadwZ1rfO.A.YDG.5u0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

cowan:
        Ralph believes that Ortcutt is a spy (transparent)
and
        Ralph believes that Ortcutt is no spy (opaque)
pc:
Gee, I would have labelled them just the opposite in the context. I
can pull the "Orcutt" out to the front of the second without Ralph
protesting at all.  But Ralph -- before he is enlightened -- would
surely protest to pulling out the first, indeed, would protest to the
first altogether.  Of course, the fact that "Orcutt" is an established
name makes the whole question more complex: it certainly allows
quantifying in in both cases, for example, but not sustitution of
external identities, for, though Ralph rejects the first, he
presumably accepts "Ralph believes that he man he saw skulking
around is a spy."

pc>|83