From sentto-44114-1981-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Tue Feb 15 00:47:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 31726 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2000 00:47:45 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 15 Feb 2000 00:47:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 9137 invoked by uid 40001); 15 Feb 2000 00:50:11 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 9128 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2000 00:50:11 -0000 Received: from ej.egroups.com (208.48.218.19) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 15 Feb 2000 00:50:11 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-1981-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.37] by ej.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Feb 2000 00:50:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 17416 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2000 00:50:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by 10.1.10.37 with QMQP; 15 Feb 2000 00:50:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp7.atl.mindspring.net) (207.69.128.51) by mta1.onelist.com with SMTP; 15 Feb 2000 00:50:07 -0000 Received: from [207.69.119.165] (user-37katt5.dialup.mindspring.com [207.69.119.165]) by smtp7.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA27659 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 19:50:02 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: rmcivor@m3.sprynet.com Message-Id: To: The Lojban List MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@onelist.com; contact lojban-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 19:50:10 -0500 From: "Robert A. McIvor" Subject: RE: [lojban] 3 loafs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "Robert A. McIvor" >Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 19:47:00 -0500 >To: "And Rosta" >From: "Robert A. McIvor" >Subject: RE: [lojban] 3 loafs >Cc: >Bcc: >X-Attachments: > >> And Rosta wrote: >>> From: John Cowan >>> >>> Robert A. McIvor scripsit: >>> >>> > >> In Loglan, I would have said 'da [pa] gentci ne rebfoa' >>> He/she/it >>> > >> again-ate a bread-loaf, which put the stress on the repetition of the >>> > >> eating act rather than the characteristics of the loaf. >>> > > >>> Ah, I see the problem. You mean to say that he is eating a loaf (the same >>> or another) on a *different* occasion, whereas I understood you to mean >>> that he is eating a loaf on *multiple* occasions, in which case I think >>> it is clear that the same loaf is meant. >> >>As for the actual Lojban ex given above, my interpretation is John's. >> > Maybe I confused things a bit by the E translation 'again-ate'. >However, >as a matter of principle, I consider a predicate to indicate an operation >which takes >arguments. I see no reason why the arguments should be considered to be >linked unless the >arguments themselves specify a linkage. To me, gentci just indicated two >eating >operations linked as a time-series. Since the bread arguments were both >indefinite, in my >opinion there is no reason to consider them linked. However, if, as in E, >one wished definitely to indicate that the same loaf was not eaten twice, >one could say ne norsao rebfoa (a not-same bread-form). Does Lojban >interpret predicates differently? > > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- FREE ADVICE FROM REAL PEOPLE! Xpertsite has thousands of experts who are willing to answer your questions for FREE. Go to Xpertsite today and put your mind to rest. Click Here ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com