From sentto-44114-16233-1033317472-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Sep 29 09:41:19 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 29 Sep 2002 09:41:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n36.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.104]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17vh88-0004NY-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 09:41:16 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-16233-1033317472-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.200] by n36.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Sep 2002 16:37:52 -0000 X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 29 Sep 2002 16:37:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 80643 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2002 16:37:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Sep 2002 16:37:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.152) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Sep 2002 16:37:51 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 09:37:51 -0700 Received: from 200.69.6.30 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:37:50 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Sep 2002 16:37:51.0283 (UTC) FILETIME=[8D678830:01C267D6] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.69.6.30] X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:37:50 +0000 Subject: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu Content-Type: text/plain X-archive-position: 1721 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list la djorden cusku di'e > > {paroi ro le re djedi} is a single term as much as > > {paroi le pavdei e le reldei} is a single term. Whatever rule > > applies to one (scopewise) should apply to the other. > >Of course... > > > The rule I think is the Right Thing is that {e}/{ro} have > > scope over {pa} in that example. > >That is of course the whole discussion. My viewpoint is that the >paroi scopes over the pavdei, which scopes over the reldei, etc. You say of course, but you don't apply it. You are not taking into account that {e} has a scope of its own as well. When you split {paroi ko'a e ko'e} into {paroi ko'a ije paroi ko'e}, you're saying that {e} has scope over {paroi}. If {paroi} had scope over {e} you could not make the expansion. Expanding {e} is equivalent to exporting {ro} to the prenex. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Plan to Sell a Home? http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/MVfIAA/GSaulB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/