| In a message dated 4/20/2001 11:35:06 AM Central Daylight Time,
xod@sixgirls.org writes: "Only females can get pregnant". This says two things: He thinks it is logically legal and conversationally rude. It is certainly not absurd (whatever that means). By the way, he also thinks that 2 is true but has nothing to do with the original sentence (rather it has to do with the definition of "female" for mammals at least). Does any of this have anything to do with any of my examples? Remember, by the way, that the English example you use is ambiguous, which may be muddling you further (though I don't see how). <ni'o ko zgana le du'u le glico cu casnu le selsnu .i ku'i le lojbo cu casnu na'ebo le selsnu ni'o va'o claxu la'e 2mai ku le glico cu tcica .ije no da smuni le lojbo> How do you observe a proposition? Metaphysical glasses? "The Englishman (&?) discusses the topic of discussion (what else is possible?) but the Lojbanist discusses something else (than what it is discussing - that really does look like an absurdity)." Who put foreward this proposition, by the way, that we might "observe it" It is certainly an interesting specimen. "under conditon lacks referent of second, the Englishman tricks and nothing is a meaning of the Lojbanist" doesn't compute, of course, though the intention is relatively clear and it is hard to argue with the last sentence. |