Re: [lojban] Re: Usage of lo and le

[John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>]

This is a little like comparing apples and
unicorns: {lo'e} is logically a very different
kind of thing from {le} -- or {lo}.  It is a
simple way to state a fairly complex claim about
a class of things (compare "the average" and the
like in English); it is not about particular
whatsises either specifically or in general.  Or,
if it is, it is so by some other means than
referentially.  

--- Maxim Katcharov <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 5/4/06, Jorge Llambías
> <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 5/4/06, Maxim Katcharov
> <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  What does it mean to have the
> > > bear "in mind"? Is it opposed to, say, "any
> bear", or "bears in
> > > general", or "bearness", or "all bears
> typically"?
> >
> > Yes. (Except for "bearness", because lo cribe
> has to be something
> > that does cribe, and bearness doesn't.)
> [...]
> > > I would like to have what "in mind" means
> explained.
> >
> > I think {le} indeed serves to preclude the
> "any" or "in general"
> > interpretation that {lo} does not preclude.
> 
> So... is it then impossible to use {lo'e} in
> conjunction with "le"? If
> it is possible, then what do you mean by {le}
> serving to preclude the
> "any" or "in general" interpretations?
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> lojban-list-request@lojban.org
> with the subject unsubscribe, or go to
> http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
> you're really stuck, send mail to
> secretary@lojban.org for help.
> 
>