Date:  Sat, 24 Jan 1998 13:18:57 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199801241818.NAA25434@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: Summary so far on DJUNO
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-UIDL: f5c2f05fa3adc6b5e9c0ba32c191a581
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 801
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Jan 26 12:42:59 1998
X-From-Space-Address: -

>    what kind of double check do you want?  i thought Yahoo press
>    releases were considered defacto truth....


Let's see. How would we say that in Lojban? Here's a possibility:

        i do djica le mo remei bo cipra
        You want what kind of double-testing?

        i mi krici le du'u jinvi le du'u le nuzba be fi la ia'us cu fatci
        I believed that it is opined that news from Yahoo are facts.

Any other suggestions? Is that an acceptable use of {fatci}?

I'm not sure how this helps us with {djuno}. Would the x4 be filled
with "the set of Yahoo press releases", or with "my (or someone's)
having read a Yahoo press release". The first one could perhaps
be a metaphysics (stretching it a bit) and the second one would
be an epistemology (again, stretching it).

co'o mi'e xorxes