Re: [lojban] Please, the best explanation of {le} vs. {lo}

[Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Анатолий Гашев <volishavas@gmail.com> wrote:

Using here {le nanmu} is not better and actually it might be wrong. Cuz it may be that I just now saw a woman, which I described as a man and I think the person is a man.
He/she has not any specific meaning for me at all that is why I called him/her {lo nanmu}, but not {le ninmu}.
Please, everybody, read xorlo-update already cuz the {lo}-meaning has changed dramatically since CLL, which is dated by 1997.

Lookup the meaning of the word "veridical". {lo} is and /always has been/ veridical- it must and can only be used for things which /actually are/ what you're describing them as. {le} is and /always has been/ non-veridical.

xorlo did not change the meaning of {lo} or {le}, it just changed how quantification works.

xorlo did actually change the meaning of {lo}. There was no {zo'e} in old-lo, there is in xorlo, this is a pretty dramatic difference.

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.