From rob@twcny.rr.com Wed Aug 29 12:27:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@telenet.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 29 Aug 2001 19:27:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 80149 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 19:26:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Aug 2001 19:26:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO telenet.net) (204.97.152.225) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Aug 2001 19:26:51 -0000 Received: from riff (ip-209-23-14-44.modem.logical.net [209.23.14.44]) by telenet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA32164 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:26:47 -0400 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15cAym-0000Dt-00 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:26:24 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:26:24 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] The Knights who forgot to say "ni!" Message-ID: <20010829152624.C740@twcny.rr.com> Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com Sender: Rob Speer From: Rob Speer On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 01:38:40PM -0400, Invent Yourself wrote: > If they are equivalent (I'd like to see somebody argue that they are not!) > why not use jei as it's shorter? People _have_ been arguing that they are not equivalent. They take the words "truth value" in the ma'oste extremely literally and say that this means the entire jei-clause is replaced with 'true' or 'false'. Of course, I think that interpretation is a load of {malfesti}. -- Rob Speer