From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:53:52 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 20676 invoked from network); 26 Sep 1997 15:07:17 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 26 Sep 1997 15:07:17 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.14C38C16@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Fri, 26 Sep 1997 17:07:06 +0100 Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 10:30:44 -0400 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Organization: Lojban Peripheral Subject: Re: ei, einai X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 732 Lines: 16 Message-ID: la xorxes. cusku di'e > Unfortunately "einai" is glossed as "freedom" in the cmavo list, > which would reverse the meaning of last two. "Freedom to do > something" is not the same as "non-obligation to do something", > but rather it is "non-obligation to NOT do something". I don't > think that the "nai" of "einai" should have this double negative > implication, so I propose to fix the gloss in the cmavo list. I think that ".einai" is "freedom from" rather than "freedom to", and that the latter does require a double negation. (Which implicitly answers my question about attitudinal vs. "na" scope.) -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban