From pycyn@aol.com Mon Feb 18 17:33:57 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 19 Feb 2002 01:33:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 34851 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2002 01:32:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m9.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Feb 2002 01:32:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m02.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.5) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Feb 2002 01:32:44 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.3b.2236fac5 (4541) for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2002 20:32:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3b.2236fac5.29a30534@aol.com> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 20:32:36 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_3b.2236fac5.29a30534_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 13358 --part1_3b.2236fac5.29a30534_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/18/2002 5:29:05 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > We seem to have at least four different interpretations of > x1 and x4 of fancu: > > xod: x1 is a name and x4 is the function > cowan: x1 is the function and x4 is an expression (a text) > lojbab: x1 is the function and x4 is something like li f(x)=x*2, > which is not very clear what it is because equations > are not numbers. > pc: x1=x4 both are the function, with the proviso that good style > requires to use a more helpful description in x4. > > I much prefer pc's version over any of the others, although even > better for me would be to drop x4 altoghether. > Why, thanks; I needed a pleasant surprise. So, leave off fancu4 and put it in, when needed (as often) in subordinate clauses. --part1_3b.2236fac5.29a30534_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/18/2002 5:29:05 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


We seem to have at least four different interpretations of
x1 and x4 of fancu:

xod: x1 is a name and x4 is the function
cowan: x1 is the function and x4 is an expression (a text)
lojbab: x1 is the function and x4 is something like li f(x)=x*2,
        which is not very clear what it is because equations
        are not numbers.
pc: x1=x4 both are the function, with the proviso that good style
    requires to use a more helpful description in x4.

I much prefer pc's version over any of the others, although even
better for me would be to drop x4 altoghether.


Why, thanks; I needed a pleasant surprise.
So, leave off fancu4 and put it in, when needed (as often) in subordinate clauses. --part1_3b.2236fac5.29a30534_boundary--