From - Mon Feb 26 10:33:35 1996 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 RAA06638 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 1996 17:55:55 -0500 Message-Id: <199602232255.RAA06638@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 02D8374E ; Fri, 23 Feb 1996 13:26:32 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 07:01:26 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: *old response to And on fuzzy proposals To: ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 802 >> >> Metalinguistic bridi can override ANYTHING. The classic example is >> >> "sei ti jitfa" embedded in a sentence (this sentence is a lie). >> >where {ti} refers to {dei}, I presume. >> Correct. Late nite "brain fart". >> Clarifying on the "brain fart", "ti" was wrong, not sloppy in the sei >> statement. > >I think calling it "wrong" is a bit extreme. Misleading, maybe. Glico, >yes. Malglico, maybe. "ti" is wrong in any printed text without some overt deitic pointer like a pretty graphic arrow (omitting of course the degenerate case of "ti" being quoted, in which case one need not expect the deitic reference to be identified. "dei" and "di'u" and "ri" and probably a few other words were added to Loglan/Lojban specifically to rid the ir meanings from "ti". lojbab