[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Re: Forget XS, let's go back to XS.

Rob Speer wrote:

On Sun, May 30, 2004 at 12:27:59PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:


On Sun, May 30, 2004 at 02:45:11PM -0400, Rob Speer wrote:


And XS right now is trying to solve all of them in one fell swoop. As
I understand it, it's saying:

"{lo} is defined as the intensional article, and it already means
everything you want it to mean."


First of all, this shouldn't be here, it should be on the BPFK/Wiki
lists.



Why shouldn't it be here? Sure, I'm putting it on the Wiki now after seeing a
bit of support for it, but why shouldn't I propose it on the main list first
before codifying it? Everyone on the BPFK/Wiki lists is on the main list. Also,
posting on the main list goes along with my general intent, which is that the
gadri discussion should be accessible to normal people, including those not
following the BPFK's every move.



Secondly, that doesn't, in any way, resemble what xorxes' proposal is.



You mean, aside from xorxes re-stating his proposal as exactly the words "{lo}
is defined as the intensional article",


Sorry for the confusion. I wrote that, Jorge didn't. I'll let him speak for himself, but my current understanding is that XS lo can be used in intensional contexts, but is not limited to them.


and the numerous things he has said in
its defense that amount to "{lo} already means everything you want it to mean"?





--
Motorists honked in celebration in this Ramadi as news spread of the assassination of the president of the Iraqi Governing Council Ezzidin Salim Monday. "The GC is nothing," one man shouted. "They are not the Governing Council. They are the Prostitution Council."