From rizen@surreality.us Tue Nov 05 16:10:33 2002
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 05 Nov 2002 16:10:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lsanca2-ar28-4-47-240-153.lsanca2.dsl-verizon.net
	([4.47.240.153] helo=surreality.us ident=mail)
	by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05)
	id 189DmA-00070z-00
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2002 16:10:30 -0800
Received: from surreality
	([127.0.0.1] helo=surreality.us ident=rizen)
	by surreality.us with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 189Dm8-0001ta-00
	for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Tue, 05 Nov 2002 16:10:29 -0800
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 16:10:21 -0800
From: Theodore Reed <rizen@surreality.us>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: What the heck is this crap?
Message-Id: <20021105161021.7e4188d7.rizen@surreality.us>
In-Reply-To: <20021105183900.B73242-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net>
References: <20021105222732.GH22843@digitalkingdom.org>
	<20021105183900.B73242-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-debian-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="=.F7ci:QS'l/'P24"
X-archive-position: 2429
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: rizen@surreality.us
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

--=.F7ci:QS'l/'P24
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 5 Nov 2002 18:42:39 -0500 (EST)
Invent Yourself <xod@thestonecutters.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> 
> > This drastically changes the semantics of lojban as I understand
> > them. As I engage in real-time conversations in the language, albeit
> > with word lookup, I feel that I understand the basic semantics
> > pretty well.
> 
> But it gets worse. According to Nick Nicholas, in a recent email to
> me:
> 
> > zo'e = su'o de
> >
> > ro bangu cu selfi'i zo'e = ro da poi bangu; su'o de zo'u: da
> > selfinti de(This is read as there being a possibly distinct de for
> > each da)
> >
> > zo'e finti ro bangu = su'o de; ro da poi bangu zo'u: de finti da
> > (This is read as there being at least one de inventing all da)

I still say that I don't know why "possibly distinct de for each da" !=
"at least one de inventing all da".

-- 
Theodore Reed (rizen/bancus)   -==-   http://surreality.us:8080/~rizen/
~GPG/PGP Signed/Encrypted Mail Preferred; Finger me for my public key!~

"Like a man who has worn eyeglasses so long that he forgets he has them
on, we forget that the world looks to us the way it does because we have
become used to seeing it that way through a particular set of lenses."
-- Kenich Ohmae

--=.F7ci:QS'l/'P24
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9yF3zw24JwM4aDNwRAjkUAKDmLS5ZRKrMXrN4EgGuBmfD62WvXACdEhnn
d5beTUXDIe6qghJNnnmP1vQ=
=yfWP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=.F7ci:QS'l/'P24--