Date:  Mon, 23 Feb 1998 12:37:04 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199802231737.MAA05285@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: Summary so far on DJUNO
X-To:         a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK
X-cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-UIDL: b6ca155c85ab4d446b1a0a1d71e75dbe
X-Mozilla-Status: 8011
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Feb 23 13:31:21 1998
X-From-Space-Address: -

>I don't really think that your point is relevant to the issue about
>{djuno}. Even if the true-x2 meaning were given to {djuno}, a lujvo
>--More--
>could be created to be the same except for the x2's truth being
>unspecified. And vice versa.

But the true-x2 meaning could not be given to djuno without adding a
metaphysics place, which is not possible.

lojbab