From pycyn@aol.com Fri Mar 01 12:31:39 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 1 Mar 2002 20:31:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 45550 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2002 20:31:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m10.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2002 20:31:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d06.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.38) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2002 20:31:38 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.61.1bc1475e (16338) for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:31:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <61.1bc1475e.29b13f27@aol.com> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:31:35 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_61.1bc1475e.29b13f27_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: 13459 --part1_61.1bc1475e.29b13f27_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/1/2002 12:31:24 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > That's what I thought. But if a sequence of texts is a text, > that means sequences are like lei, not like le'i, because > a set of texts is not a text. > But is a mass of text a text? A mass of dogs is not a dog. cowana LUhA. Which one?> LAhE? None obviously fit. <>Test question: when you write out what is said as {abu prami by} is the >written form exactly the same or is it {a prami b}? It's either exactly the same or it is {A prami B}, never {a prami b}.> How exactly are you using the capitals? Are they abbreviations for the letteral words? This seems to add a new wrinkle to an already confusing (if not confused) situation, since capital letters have different letteral words. But where did {MI} as short for {my ibu} come from? I didn't know you could abbreviate and certainly would have thought of this abbreviation. --part1_61.1bc1475e.29b13f27_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/1/2002 12:31:24 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


That's what I thought. But if a sequence of texts is a text,
that means sequences are like lei, not like le'i, because
a set of texts is not a text.


But is a mass of text a text?  A mass of dogs is not a dog.

cowan<?  Perhaps one cannot use an article directly, but must use
>a LUhA.

Which one?>

LAhE? None obviously fit.

<>Test question: when you write out what is said as {abu prami by} is the
>written form exactly the same or is it {a prami b}?

It's either exactly the same or it is {A prami B}, never {a prami b}.>

How exactly are you using the capitals? Are they abbreviations for the letteral words? This seems to add a new wrinkle to an already confusing (if not confused) situation, since capital letters have different letteral words.

<Why?

Because otherwise we would not be able to tell appart {mi}
from {MI} = {my.ibu}.>

But where did {MI} as short for {my ibu} come from?  I didn't know you could abbreviate and certainly would have thought of this abbreviation.




 --part1_61.1bc1475e.29b13f27_boundary--