Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 19763 invoked from network); 24 May 2000 14:16:17 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 24 May 2000 14:16:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 7374 invoked by uid 40001); 24 May 2000 14:17:31 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 7371 invoked from network); 24 May 2000 14:17:30 -0000 Received: from jj.egroups.com (208.50.144.82) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 24 May 2000 14:17:30 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-2831-959177847-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.38] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 May 2000 14:17:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 13844 invoked from network); 24 May 2000 14:17:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 May 2000 14:17:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.108) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 May 2000 14:17:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 57017 invoked by uid 0); 24 May 2000 14:17:26 -0000 Message-ID: <20000524141726.57016.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 12.128.10.26 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 24 May 2000 07:17:26 PDT X-Originating-IP: [12.128.10.26] To: lojban@egroups.com From: "Jorge Llambias" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@egroups.com; contact lojban-owner@egroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@egroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 07:17:26 PDT Subject: Re: [lojban] le ga'irfanta Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1693 Lines: 46 la pycyn cusku di'e > << > le ga'irfanta fanmo detri cu sumji lo nanca be li su'omu > le detri be le nu lei cukta mu'o selpaprybi'o >> > >Thanks! >Oops! It was an illegitimate lujvo all along. Ah, well, the message was >more important than its expression? We can't really tell whether the Lojban gets the message across by itself when we have already seen the English translation. >I still have my worries about , but this is pretty close to regular >mathematical addition anyhow -- and seems to cover the a- (even >anti-)symmetric cases. I just can't see anyone adding anything to the date. It is a relationship between dates, not between an agent and the dates. But I agree I am stretching {sumji}, because {lo nanca} is not the same kind of thing as {lo detri}. >Couldn't the second date given be just that of the publication of the first >book, since is implicitly quantified ? The ruling involved >wants (or use ). I could have used {le}, I guess. But I take the implicit quantification of {lei} to be {piro}. I know the book says otherwise, but {pisu'o} just doesn't make sense to me, for the same reason that {ro} has to be the default for {le}. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Best friends, most artistic, class clown Find 'em here: http://click.egroups.com/1/4054/3/_/17627/_/959177847/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com