Re: [lojban] {lo'i} as a Q-kau solution?

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

la rob cusku di'e

> If you evaluate an abstraction the moment you hear it, you remove the part 
> of
> the sentence which gives it any meaning whatsoever. As I just mentioned 
> before
> (on the wrong thread, assuming this one had stopped), {mi djuno leni galtu 
> be
> la bob.} does not mean {mi djuno le pamuno centre}, because the second is 
> the
> first with the only part of the meaning that matters removed.

Of course. But {ni} is ambiguous, sometimes it refers to a number,
sometimes to an indirect question (or whatever we are calling it
this week).

> The HP49's programming language does not include the concept of layers of
> abstraction in this case. Lojban, OTOH, should if it is to be speakable at
> all, because we use layers of abstraction in ordinary communication much 
> more
> than we do in programming.

No doubt about it. But {le broda} is an instant evaluator, as you
put it (sometimes you want instant evaluation!) while {le du'u
makau broda} is not. It makes no sense mixing them up.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp