From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Sat Mar  6 22:57:25 2010
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Date: Wed Jan 29 13:37:12 1997
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: _The Linguistics Wars_
X-To:         jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR
X-cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-UIDL: ec6ce612bedbec07fc6ba44ab558f68d
Status: U
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 351
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Jan 29 13:37:12 1997
X-From-Space-Address: -
Message-ID: <1MWJrc2XYqI.A.blB.V50kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

> On the other hand,
>the quick translation:
>
>        la spiros smadi la ekslaks
>
>would be utterly sensless no matter what the context.

Why?  is it not possible to give a name to a "fact".  Isn't that what we do
with things like "Newton's Laws".

Seems a very Lojbanic thing to do - to recognize abstractions as being a
nameable "thing".

lojbab