From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Fri Jun 20 14:04:26 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 64200 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 21:04:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 20 Jun 2003 21:04:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 21:04:26 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19TT3a-0006aB-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:04:26 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19TT3U-0006Zq-00; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:04:20 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web41903.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.154]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19TT3K-0006ZY-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:04:10 -0700 Message-ID: <20030620210340.30789.qmail@web41903.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web41903.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:03:40 PDT Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:03:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [lojban] Re: jbovlaste example. To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <20030620205751.GP7321@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 5721 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Jorge "Llambías" Reply-To: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=142311107 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20202 --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 01:49:26PM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > > > --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 01:11:55PM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > > > > > "kunti", or "kutyjbi" for "near-vacuum". > > > > > > kunti is exactly what the original poster was arguing against; > > > vacuum is *not* empty. > > > > I would have said he was arguing that "vacuum" _does_ mean "empty". > > Travis said: "Just because we've never observed a perfect vacuum > > or the lack of gravity, shouldn't affect the meanings of the words." > > You keep snipping too much. > > We were talking about human-constructed vacuum inside a room here on > earth, which presumably is not perfect. That's why I said "kutyjbi" for "near-vacuum". mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com