Re: [lojban] tu'o usage

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

la pycyn cusku di'e

> All of the supposed complications are exactly paralleled for your system,

Not really. In my system, ro = no naku = naku su'o naku = naku me'iro.
Some of those don't work with other systems. That's what makes them
complicated.

> and
> more likely to need to be used there, since the non-importing {ro} is less
> common in actual usage than the importing.

How can you tell? In most usage we don't deal with empty sets,
so it makes no difference. A clearly non-importing case would
be saying something like "the only world where every politician
is honest is a world with no politicians" (we don't like
politicians much around here these days).

> Also, since Lojban is following
> formal logic, it is more or less forced to the importing form that that 
> logic
> uses (the apparent exception being an aberration that ran briefly form 
> about
> 1858 to 1958).

Are those the dates of some particular events?

> Oops!  See how hard it is to even think of non-importing affirmative
> universals.  I meant to say {ro da broda} but immediately fell into the
> formula needed in normal discourse to make "non-importing" claims.

{ro da broda} would be true in an empty universe, yes. Is that
problematic?

mu'o mi'e xorxes




_________________________________________________________________
Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com