Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la pycyn cusku di'e

> > Consider the text of each chapter of a book. Then the mass
> > of texts from all chapters are the text of the book, they
> > collaborate to be the text of the book.
>
> This is not obvious, albeit plausible. How do the details go?

I've no idea. Pure intuition on my part.

> <Sorry, I don't know how else to say it. I write {li 4 sumji li 2 li 2}
> and read out /li pa sumji li re li re/. Then I write {A prami mi}
> and read out /abu prami mi/.>
>
> Well, let's see: they refer to the same thing (the letter "a", the number
> one), one is an abbreviation for the other.

"li 1" and "li pa" refer to the same thing yes (to the number one),
one is an abbreviation for the other.

"abu" and "A" also refer to the same thing (to Alice), one is
an abbreviation for the other. None of them refers to a letter.

> Not in Refgram or anywhere else
> I've found -- and a dangerous practice where every mark already has a
> meaning. Where on the wiki?

If the author of the proposal could find it, please post the address!
I get lost in the Wiki, I just look at the Recent Changes to see
what's going on there, but this proposal was from some months ago.

> <I don't want to refer to them (capital letters) at all. I'm just
> using them.>
>
> Well, you say {MI} means {my ibu} which looks suspiciously like a 
> descriptive
> reference, but the reference is to {mi}.

No, there is no reference to the first person pronoun {mi} in
{my ibu}. {my ibu} is a third person pronoun, which might refer,
for example, to Mary Ingalls in some context.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.