From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Jan 20 07:26:40 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 97709 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2005 15:26:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m17.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 20 Jan 2005 15:26:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Jan 2005 15:26:39 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CreCl-0003Pj-3G for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:26:39 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CreCe-0003PE-Uy; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:26:33 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:26:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from fysh.org ([83.170.75.51] helo=bowl.fysh.org ident=mail) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1CreCU-0003P3-Ht for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:26:22 -0800 Received: from zefram by bowl.fysh.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CreCS-0004lg-00 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:26:20 +0000 Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:26:20 +0000 Message-ID: <20050120152620.GF3649@fysh.org> References: <20050120140217.GD3649@fysh.org> <20050120152013.16360.qmail@web41902.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050120152013.16360.qmail@web41902.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-archive-position: 9292 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: zefram@fysh.org X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-From: Zefram From: Zefram Reply-To: zefram@fysh.org Subject: [lojban] Re: outer and inner quantifiers on "le" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23674 Jorge Llambías wrote: >(Now, {pa fi'u re le nanmu} is another story.) How so? Is {pa fi'u re} not equivalent to {pimu} here? -zefram