From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sat Aug 04 18:38:12 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 5 Aug 2001 01:38:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 56880 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 01:38:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Aug 2001 01:38:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.54) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Aug 2001 01:38:12 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:38:12 -0700 Received: from 200.69.11.214 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 05 Aug 2001 01:38:11 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.69.11.214] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] ka + makau (was: ce'u (was: vliju'a Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 01:38:11 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 01:38:12.0010 (UTC) FILETIME=[49C120A0:01C11D4F] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 9189 la xod cusku di'e >What fact are you stating with du'u do prami makau Not much, but then neither are you claiming much with {du'u do prami la djan} >I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by "hidden from view". Not exposed. Suppose John goes to the market. There is a proposition, {la djan klama le zarci}, which can be used to describe that fact. But you can also use the proposition to describe relationships between that fact and other things, for example {la meris djuno le du'u la djan klama le zarci}, a relationship between Mary and the fact that John goes to the market. Now, let's take a piece of black cardboard and place it on la djan, and for representational purposes let's call that piece of cardboard makau, so we get {la meris djuno le du'u makau klama le zarci}. The fact that John goes to the market remains the same, the relationship between that fact and Mary remains the same, all that changes is that you are using a less explicit way of referring to that fact, maybe because you don't care to display the name of the goer (even though the fact that it is John remains, and the fact that Mary knows it also remains) or maybe even because you yourself don't know who went to the store, although Mary does and you know that she does. In any case, the relationship that you claim is one between Mary and a fact (that John goes to the store) that you are not fully revealing. The same thing happens with {ka}. makau can even cover different values for different values of the property holder. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp