Date:  Sat, 20 Dec 1997 13:44:18 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712201844.NAA24957@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: xor questions (was Re: indirect Qs (was Re: On logji lo
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 894
X-From-Space-Date: Sat Dec 20 13:44:19 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

Lojbab:
>But you need not express it in standard notation. Lojban can express the
>indicated sentence using
>ro lu'i lo tcati .onai lo ckafi

You must mean {ro lu'a lu'i lo tcati onai lo ckafi}, but that's not what And
meant by "each of {tea xor coffee}". Your version simply says "for each
of a set that contains as elements either tea or coffee". But And wanted
"tell me for each of tea and coffee, but what you tell me for each must be
different", which is not a standard meaning of "xor".

>or more convenient to the issue
>ma po'u pa lu'i lo tcati ce lo ckafi cu se vasru

Here you want {ma po'u pa lu'a lo tcati ce lo ckafi}. If you
use {lu'i} then you get the set whose only element is the set
{tea; coffee}, since {ce} by itself already defines a set.

But this is just like And's original form. {lo glare} or
{lo selpinxe} work as unhelpful answers to that question.

co'o mi'e xorxes