From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Sat Aug 25 18:48:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 26 Aug 2001 01:48:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 84264 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 01:48:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Aug 2001 01:48:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta03-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.43) by mta3 with SMTP; 26 Aug 2001 01:48:20 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.255.40.45]) by mta03-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010826014818.LVVL23687.mta03-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:48:18 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: soi (was: RE: mine, thine, hisn, hern, itsn ourn, yourn and theirn Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:47:31 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" Jorge: > As for special constructions, I think {soi} is the worst offender. > A whole construction just to take care of the word "viceversa"? I think the soi construction is pretty feeble, or maybe I just don't understand it properly, but I do think that a logically explicit "viceversa" construction deserves to exist. It seems to me that viceversa constructions can be handled by reciprocals: I went from London to Paris and vice versa = I went from London to Paris and from Paris to London = I went from each of x = {London, Paris} to each other x Two questions: 1. Are there things that can be said with "soi" or with "vice versa" that can't be done by this reciprocal method? 2. How does Lojban do reciprocals? (E.g. "The children love each other".) I can't find anything relevant in the Book index. --And.