OK, "arithmetic" in the technical sense, i.e., the theory of the natural numbers, from Peano's axioms or Frege's or from set theory by any of various routes -- or all of the above. West Coast (vs. East) in the 60's seems to have been characterized by (among several other points) by starting the natural numbers at 0 and by using variable outside the ordering to begin with, then switching over to ordinals beginning with 0. "UCLA" is just hubris, though that is where most of this stuff was done in those days. But Berkeley would do almost as well, even Stanford, but definitely not Harvard or Princeton
From: "MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com" <MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2009 10:33:52 PM
Subject: [lojban] Re: xorlo
In a message dated 9/8/2009 22:11:53 Eastern Daylight Time, kali9putra@yahoo.com writes:
I actually start with daxino, which tells you I learned my arithemetic at UCLA in the 60s.
I almost wrote "daxino", but decided "daxipa" would get my point across.
The only clue that would have told me that you learned your arithmetic at UCLA in the 60s is you telling me so. I know nothing about learning arithmetic at UCLA in the 60s. How did you not know arithmetic before going to UCLA? Or how do mean the phrase "learn arithmetic"?
stevo