Re: [lojban] Revising mu'ei and CAhA once again. Possible worlds.

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Gleki Arxokuna
<gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> bi'ai is described as naka'ena which in my scheme is equal to {ca'a}.

I can't see your scheme without registering to Facebook, but "ca'a"
("actually") is not the same as ""bi'ai"="naka'ena" ("necessarily").

If something is necessarily the case, then it must be actually the
case, but not the other way around. You may hold a philosophical
position that says that everything that is the case is necessarily so
(i.e. it could not have been any different), but linguistically it
doesn't work, because we can and do talk about how things could have
been different. If everything necessarily had to be the way it is,
nothing could have been different.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.