From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Wed Nov 03 10:22:44 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 48127 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2004 18:22:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166) by m21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Nov 2004 18:22:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Nov 2004 18:22:43 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CPPmL-0001Qs-MF for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:22:41 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CPPlQ-0001Lt-Hk; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:21:44 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:21:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from web41904.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.155]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CPPlE-0001IY-2X for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:21:32 -0800 Message-ID: <20041103182058.49411.qmail@web41904.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web41904.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:20:58 PST Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:20:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20041103181408.47683.qmail@web41904.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 8932 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 X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 From: Jorge "Llambías" Reply-To: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Subject: [lojban] Re: na scope. Again. X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=142311107 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23338 --- Jorge Llambías wrote: > --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 07:12:16AM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > > I am doing the section on NA, which should cover some of that. My > > > intention is to propose an interpretation where the scope of {na} > > > is restricted to what follows it. > > > > This would change the meaning of simple negations like "mi na klama > > le zarci", would it not? Good mabla luck. > > Not at all, how would that change? There are no quantifiers > or connectives to interact with {na} there. What it would change is simple negations like {mi e do na klama le zarci}. Instead of meaning that either I don't go, or you don't go, or both, it would mean that neither I nor you go. mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com