From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Sun Sep 02 08:10:49 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 2 Sep 2001 15:10:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 26464 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 15:10:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142)
  by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Sep 2001 15:10:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mta05-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.45)
  by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Sep 2001 15:10:37 -0000
Received: from andrew ([62.253.88.86]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP
          id <20010902151035.VJAL20588.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew>
          for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:10:35 +0100
Reply-To: <a.rosta@ntlworld.com>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] The Knights who forgot to say "ni!"
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:09:50 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMGEHBEKAA.a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <20010831140105.A832@twcny.rr.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 10404

Rob:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 06:04:28PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> > Rob:
> > > "whether D is a crook". Not every grammatical construct has to be
> "evaluated"
> > > to something shorter.
> >
> > In general, things *are* fully evaluated in Lojban. The times when you want
> > something that doesn't evaluate are special cases, that call for special
> > constructions, the ones that cause us so much perplexity.
>
> If you performed the kind of "evaluation" people are suggesting for {jei} all
> the time, then saying {la spat. gerku} would be instantly replaced by "true"
> and communicate nothing.

A bridi is one of those special constructions that is exempt from evaluation.
Indeed, it is *the( special construction par excellence. That is why when,
as in the Q-kau discussions, and the needing a box and seeking a unicorn
discussions, some sumti musn't be instantly-evaluated, we seek a solution
that involves embedding the sumti within a subordinate bridi, so as to
block evaluation. I'm not making this up, or laying down the law, or
speaking ex cathedra; I'm describing long-long-established Loglan/Lojban
semantic principles -- or so I believe.

--And.