Date:  Wed, 10 Dec 1997 11:26:44 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712101626.LAA06505@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject:      Re: ni, jei, perfectionism
X-To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 505
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Dec 10 11:26:47 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

Jorge to Lojbab:
> >In the forner case, what appears to me an indirect question is not really -
> >it is an English idiom, and there is a non-indirect-question that can
> >substitute.  In the second, either a different indirect question is being
> >discussed, or it is a fact that is being discussed.
>
> I was not aware that people used indirect questions as idioms to
> mean something else. Is this a commonly accepted fact, or is it
> something you just thought up for this argument?

The latter.
zo`o