it should be
"le". Why? Because it is a particular thing you you have in mind,
namely, "that thing which attacked me". Yes I thought of that too.
But is 'a dog' really specific? Let's say the story continues: "A dog attacked me last night. It was near the bridge. The dog jumped on me."
When I say: 'the dog jumped on me', now it means that i'm referring to a particular dog, the dog which i introduced two sentences before.
What's the difference?
--- On Thu, 11/13/08, Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: And more le and lo
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Date: Thursday, November 13, 2008, 9:38
PM
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Tom Gysel <to_mu1975@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Since 'le' carries the requirement of having a specific thing in
mind, and
> 'lo' has to refer to something which really fits the description,
which
> gadri (or any other solution) would we use for ' a dog' in the
sentence: ' a
> dog attacked me last night'? (bearing in mind that it was dark and so
maybe
> it was a dog, or a wolf, or any other doglike creature.)
If one were to use the CLL definition, then really, it should be
"le". Why? Because it is a particular thing you you have in mind,
namely, "that thing which attacked me".
That being said, I'm surprised to find that no one has yet
short-circuited this whole discussion with reference to xorlo (
http://www.lojban.org/tiki//tiki-index.php?page=How+to+use+xorlo&bl ).
While not yet officially official, it's been accepted
unanimously by
the BPFK, and is in common use in the lojban community. In short, the
part of xorlo that is relevant here is that there is no longer any
veridical (truthiness) component to "lo", so that, under xorlo
"lo"
would be the right word to use in that sentence.
--gejyspa
|