[lojban] Re: semantic primes

["Jorge Llambías" <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On 3/18/06, John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>  Maybe we can assume that the
> frame of reference is always a person looking
> some way and collapse the whole to the person (as
> you seem to suggest) and assume he is looking the
> way he in fact is,

Why do you need to assume that? Isn't a person always
looking the way they in fact are?

> but that seems to me to miss a
> lot of cases.  How are they to be expressed?

Which case does it miss?

mu'o mi'e xorxes


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.