Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:05:57 -0500 (EST) Organization: University of Central Lancashire From: drv.cbc.com!a.rosta@cbgate.cbc.com To: cowan@scotty.sys.drv.cbc.com Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:36:32 GMT+0 Subject: Re: forward from Greg Higley Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.33) Message-Id: <303F53244E@mail-gw.uclan.ac.uk> X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 2281 X-From-Space-Date: Thu Oct 16 16:06:00 1997 X-From-Space-Address: drv.cbc.com!a.rosta@cbgate.cbc.com This answered some of my questions in a post I sent before I received it. So don't bother replying (on the redundancy of ka). > Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:44:36 -0400 > Reply-to: John Cowan > From: John Cowan > Organization: Lojban Peripheral > Subject: Re: forward from Greg Higley > X-To: Lojban List > To: And Rosta > Lee Daniel Crocker wrote: > > > From the examples, {le ka > > do xunre} is the property of your being red, but not necessarily any > > particular instance {nu} of it at any particular time or place, so > > there's no {ce'u} there anywhere. > > True. But I suggest (see below) that the wording "proposition that > you are red" is better English, and that using "du'u" rather than > "ka" in that case is more perspicuous Lojban. > > JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS wrote: > > > You can't have a {ka} without an explicit or implicit {ce'u}. > > What would it mean, other than {nu}? If you don't agree that > > a property must always be a property _of_ something, how > > do you say "property" in Lojban? > > I think that a zero-adic intension ("ka" with no "ce'u" explicit > or implicit) is a "du'u". The word "property" is too limited > to capture the full meaning of "le ka ...", which means > "proposition" when zero-adic, "property" when monadic, and > "relation" when dy-or-more-adic. > > The main use of "du'u" is > to make it clear that no "ce'u" is present, and also to add > the convenience x2 place (le se du'u = lu'e le du'u). > > > Right. The default place for {ce'u} is the first open slot. > > Probably usually. It's not a rule. > > > > Most > > > lojbanists would use {ka ckule} and {ka se ckule} in very different > > > ways. But again, the rules say that they are the same -- otherwise > > > we are 'favoring' the first sumti over the others. > > > > > Yes, in a sense we are. > > The rules say that both "ka ckule" and "ka se ckule" are incomplete, > because they have ellipsized places. These places must be filled in > by extra-grammatical conventions. > > > -- > John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org > e'osai ko sarji la lojban >