Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 06 Feb 2006 13:00:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1F6Cz1-00072G-GB for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2006 12:29:11 -0800 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.205]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1F6Cyy-000729-Mu for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2006 12:29:11 -0800 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id r28so1158780nza for ; Mon, 06 Feb 2006 12:29:07 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:from:to:references:subject:date:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole; b=gxpVTAXJCPScmQJk9mKeYRwRYR8YIgc6HmwhcCK2r8ApxwmwhgfN8GcAWsSWVMzw9gAB2hM654iT98ViTOYQSM2pn5KMYQYXDRq7r4VjNv/fkTErWn30s3l6hp+HPEq9+9At6MI1IPqFtuHns0yjGjtuarbHyTIzYs5Z9/x1rrw= Received: by 10.36.46.20 with SMTP id t20mr4309206nzt; Mon, 06 Feb 2006 12:29:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from caroe1 ( [65.218.132.157]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 19sm129789nzp.2006.02.06.12.29.04; Mon, 06 Feb 2006 12:29:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <009201c62b5b$c1be4b90$a0d2400a@caroe1> From: "Betsemes" To: , "Main Lojban List" References: <2d3df92a0602060817s25d1da84t96c51ccfd901073c@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560602061113r30badf0fj288331d0b5a0e00c@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Lojban Reader Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 16:27:28 -0400 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) X-archive-position: 3051 X-Approved-By: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: betsemes@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 976 > Hmm... If I did, I probably didn't put it that way. Pointing at something > non-physical would seem to be impossible rather than illegal. {ti} is > _supposed_ to refer to things you can point at, but sometimes > people don't use it that way. This might not be lojbanic at all and might violate what {ti} was intended to, But it occurs to me that {ti} might refer to something imaginary that we have been elaborating during a writing (or reading). We might for example be elaborating on a book and say {ti} to refer to that book that has its existence at the imagination realm. This might not agree with the official meaning of the {ti} words, but what happens if you are reading a book and find that usage? The book is already written and the word is being used thus. The author might argue just what makes you think that concepts and imaginary things are not actually physical in some other plane of existence? Maybe usage will change the meaning of {ti}, just maybe.