Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 07:17:56 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712161217.HAA05553@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: For And's pleasure X-To: a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1545 X-From-Space-Date: Tue Dec 16 07:17:57 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU >All in all, it doesn't seem at all egregious. At the same time, >I don't see why it is a "logical gem"; it seems pretty >straightfoward. Well, I started with "worse than everything (including itself?)" as the start of a "logical gem". Then there was the use of "du" in a predicate language for a non-equational meaning. Then the use of a tense in what is only tensed because English isn't tenseless. An dthe hubris that something is a logical gem, merely because it uses lots of daxis (but no prenex, which means that the scopes f these variables are probably quite up in the air). And finally, the two-sentence pair being so helplessly mimicking of colloquial English (you left out the second sentence in your comment, but how se sakli IS a solid-grease-covering eel, anyway? Malglico in the extreme, IMNSHO. The only thing I find positive about it is that it is grammatical and the grammaticality carries over to Lojban desoite the complexity of the sentence, merely by direct substitution. As a demonstration of how close we remain, it is a gem. Logically, .a'unaicairo'i vamtu lojbab ---- lojbab lojbab@access.digex.net Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: ftp.access.digex.net /pub/access/lojbab or see Lojban WWW Server: href="http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/" Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.