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

[Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>]

xod:
> Rob:
> >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.

That's correct. I don't see the point of a gadri that could be used
only in "intensional contexts", i.e. for the x2 of djica, nitcu, sisku, 
perhaps claxu. The predicates themselves create the intensional context,
there is no need, in my opinion, for a gadri to redundantly emphasize it. 
All that is required is to use a constant term there and not a quantified
one. (A quantified term is still permitted, but it gives the usually
unwanted meaning.)

mu'o mi'e xorxes
 


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/