From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun Mar 26 08:13:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 7635 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2006 16:13:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m29.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Mar 2006 16:13:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2006 16:13:40 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FNXrz-0001K9-Ss for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 08:13:36 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FNXrK-0001Ic-Hy; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 08:12:55 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 26 Mar 2006 08:12:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FNXqq-0001IK-Ql for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 08:12:25 -0800 Received: from imo-d20.mx.aol.com ([205.188.139.136]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FNXqo-0001I9-BK for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 08:12:24 -0800 Received: from MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com by imo-d20.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.3.) id d.2ad.762bd6 (57341) for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:12:19 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <2ad.762bd6.31581763@wmconnect.com> Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:12:19 EST MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_2ad.762bd6.31581763_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 for Windows XP sub 52 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/) X-archive-position: 11248 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 X-eGroups-From: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com From: lojban-out@lojban.org Reply-To: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Subject: [lojban] "OPPOSITE" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=nRK8ZS8TIWMZ1zxCA3r8HNIMyNWgaYyPupPsGSr21FOoEL_B6A X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 25658 --part1_2ad.762bd6.31581763_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/26/2006 4:22:00 AM Central Standard Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes: > Ok, but a claim that there are other reasons is not > as convincing as the reasons themselves might > eventually be. I am not saying that OPPOSITE > has to be a prime, all I'm saying is that it is odd > that they wouldn't have it as a prime, given that > it's so productive. (And also given that I can't > imagine what it's paraphrase in terms of the > given primes might be.) > It seems that "NOT" would provide the meaning of "OPPOSITE". stevo --part1_2ad.762bd6.31581763_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 3/26/2006 4:22= :00 AM Central Standard Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes:


Ok, but a claim that ther= e are other reasons is not
as convincing as the reasons themselves might
eventually be. I am not saying that OPPOSITE
has to be a prime, all I'm saying is that it is odd
that they wouldn't have it as a prime, given that
it's so productive. (And also given that I can't
imagine what it's paraphrase in terms of the
given primes might be.)


It seems that "NOT" would provide the meaning of "OPPOSITE".

stevo --part1_2ad.762bd6.31581763_boundary--