RE: [jboske] Lojbab on tu'o (was: RE: RE: Nick on propositionalism &c

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

Lojbab:
> At 12:43 AM 1/13/03 +0000, And Rosta wrote:
> > > If A is true if zo'e is interpreted as "3", then why do we want 
> > anything else?
> > >
> > > zo'e means "some value that makes the sentence true"
> >
> >Surely not! Else every sentence with an ellipsis would be true by
> >definition!
> 
> Of course. We presume that pragmatically people say things they want to 
> communicate as being true 

I see now what you meant.

> > > zi'o is appropriate
> > > if no value makes sense at all as in Cowan's example of an
> > > untranslatable joke
> >
> >That's not really what zi'o means, but I don't want to get into
> >a discussion about this now. I'm not sure whether you know what
> >it means and just described it poorly: you said that zi'o catra
> >is meaningless to you, which isn't a good sign 
> 
> zi'o means what CLL and the cmavo list say it means until/unless the byfy 
> changes it. I'll be satisfied if Cowan (or someone else) gives me a 
> practical example of when one would say zi'o catra, and it would indeed 
> have something to do with catra and not merely morsi binxo

Why must it have something to do with catra and not merely morsi binxo?
Catra is a 2-place predicate. Catra be fa zi'o is a different predicate.

--And.