X-Digest-Num: 71
Message-ID: <44114.71.394.959273824@eGroups.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 00:15:33 +0800
From: Lin Zhemin <ljm@ljm.qqjane.net>
Subject: Re: Dao De Jing [was Re: Promoting Lojban]
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 394
Content-Length: 830
Lines: 22

Mon, 22 Feb 1999, zo Robin Turner(robin@Bilkent.EDU.TR) cusku di'e
> > So why just call it "zo dao." ? :-)
> Because anything you say about {zo dao} would be a statement about the word
> "dao", not the Dao - but then maybe that's the point you're making ;-)

But can you say, e.g., {la dao.} ? {la dao.} is translated as "the one
called Dao", and thus defines there _is_ one (thing), and implies that 
it has the characteristic of having the name, "Dao". Well, according to
Laozi, "I don't know its name, so I called it Dao"; thus it hasn't the
name, and that's just the way someone (Laozi) called it. So {zo dao.}
would be better, IMHO, anyway.


-- 

.e'osai ko sarji la lojban.	==> 請支持邏輯語言。
co'o mi'e lindjy,min.		==> 再見，我是林哲民。
Fingerprint20 = CE32 D237 02C0 FE31 FEA9  B858 DE8F AE2D D810 F2D9