Re: [lojban] da, scope, usage

[Invent Yourself <xod@sixgirls.org>]

On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Rob Speer wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 04:53:10PM -0500, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
> > Although Refgram 7.13 (162) says that a bound variable is stable until
> > rebound, the details in 16.14 (410) say 1) that requantified variables refer
> > so subparts of the referent of the original -- but for one occurrence only
> > then return to the full previous reference and 2) that they are stable
> > through sentences joined by ijeks, "theoretically a bare ".i" terminates the
> > scope"  with some further rules about shorter scopes and conventions about
> > informally and formally lengthening the scope.
>
> Okay - I should have read this before sending my previous message.
>
> So the important part is that the part of the Book which mentions this
> makes allowances for the fact that people don't give a hoot about scope,
> so that {da} can retain its meaning, if not its pure logical content,
> past {.i}.
>
> Which brings me back to the original thing I asked: why use {da} when
> you don't plan to use it again, and only want to claim existence? Why
> not {zo'e} or some other KOhA?



ni'ibo zo ko'a na bapli le kamzasti




-- 
"You can not stop us. We have this anthrax. You die now. Are you afraid?
Death to America. Death to Israel. Allah is great."