Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA31784 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 16:35:28 +0200 Message-Id: <199601221435.QAA31784@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BBC96F72 ; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 15:35:34 +0100 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 10:00:29 -0500 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Subject: Re: tech:logic matters X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199601202032.PAA02224@locke.ccil.org> from "ucleaar" at Jan 17, 96 07:50:31 pm Content-Length: 688 Lines: 17 mi joi la .and. cusku be di'e casnu > > My recent proposal that "ro prenu" means "ro da poi prenu" (and not > > "ro lo prenu") restores the original pre-Lojban situation. > > But hang on. The {ro prenu/ro lo prenu} distinction concerns the dogbiting > issue. Now you're saying that {ro prenu} = {ro da poi kea prenu} & > pc says the latter means there are prenu, so you're also making the > {ro prenu/ro lo prenu} distinction do existential import too. Is that > what you really want? I don't care about existential import (but feel free to try to convince me that I should). -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.