RE: [lojban] da, scope, usage

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>]

Rob:
> 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?

In classical Lojban, da was the quantified variable. You use it where
in logic you use a quantified variable. Maybe that's no longer the
case.
 
> > Y'all should pay attention -- especially if And and pc (and throw 
> in xorxes) 
> > agree about ANYTHING.
> 
> I think people begin to tune out when the thread starts to involve such
> things as "Mr." or "extension", or acronyms like "SAE". I don't know why
> I kept reading for so long.

"Mr" and "extension" are linguistic/philosophical jargon, but SAE =
Standard Average European (invented by Whorf? Or Sapir?), and hence is
a broadened version of "(mal)glico", and hence a term of interest to
more than just the 'cabal'.

> > We over here in TRUTH resent the "non-user" crack and laugh at the 
> absurdity 
> > of us as a cabal.
> 
> Well, And was honest enough to admit once that he doesn't use the
> language, he only discusses it. Don't know about you.

Actually, over the years my occasional use has probably mounted up 
to a sizable amount. However, usage interests me only as a tool for 
exploring the language design, so I am content to be labelled a
nonuser, or as one of those beings who does not earn kudos, credit
and influence through usage.
 
--And.