Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 13:32:03 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199802201832.NAA05612@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com Sender: Lojban list From: bob@rattlesnake.com Subject: Re: zo djuno ce zo jetyju'o X-To: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: <1BE3173D30@mail-gw.uclan.ac.uk> (message from And Rosta on Fri, 20 Feb 1998 17:38:14 GMT+0) X-UIDL: dac5794398f214ee27849c5f3401cd33 X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Feb 20 13:20:04 1998 X-From-Space-Address: - a.rosta@uclan.ac.uk writes: This is surely the crux. Are we really going to have to interrogate Lojbab at inordinate length about the meaning of every gismu. Yes! Or else interrogate the simulation of him that we hold in our minds. (Quicker, easier, and probably not all that likely to give a large number of false answers.) We just have two competing definitions of {djuno}. One, which is different from but akin to English "know", and which has been clearly articulated, ... Yes, you did make what I consider a clear articulation in one of your summaries, and to my way of understanding it ended up on examination as being similar to what Lojbab proposed. This conclusion is not what you intended, but is what I came to. Hence, based on my experience of these discussions, I think we will succeed just fine by interrogating our internal simulations of Lojbab, and only occasionally raising matters for discussion. -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com