From pycyn@aol.com Fri Aug 31 13:42:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 31 Aug 2001 20:42:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 6498 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 20:41:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Aug 2001 20:41:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r04.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.100) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Aug 2001 20:41:33 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id r.12a.3a6177e (18255) for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:41:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <12a.3a6177e.28c15071@aol.com> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:41:21 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] li'i (was: Another stab at a Record on ce'u To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_12a.3a6177e.28c15071_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_12a.3a6177e.28c15071_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/31/2001 12:08:25 PM Central Daylight Time, a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes: > ., > mi> = (different "quotes" since the stuff inside is > not > > obviously Lojban). > > I have not said anything even remotely like this, unless by some calamitous > typing error while tired. > > {le si'o ce'u broda kei be mi} = my notion of Broda > > However, I did say that when people think they want a ce'u in li'i, > what they really want is not a ce'u but a variable bound to le se li'i. > I apologize. I seem to have joined (against my intentions) the group that have taken {li'i} into the group with {si'o} and then slid from the obscurity about {li'i} to one about {si'o}. But just what does "the {ce'u} is a variable bound to le se li'i" mean? The first guess, again, is that it is just "replace {ce'u} by le se li'i," which makes sense, but seems unduly curcuitous. Another is that it means a variable whose range depends upon what is referred to by li se li'i -- my experience of the dark (I don't know where the {ce'u} is supposed to go here) is different from yours because what is unlit for me is different from for you? I guess I need some examples with explanation. I gather that, in fact, you don't think that {ce'u} as a lambda variable belongs in {li'i} and that I certainly agree with. I'm less clear what you do think belongs there, other than {zo'e} and content. --part1_12a.3a6177e.28c15071_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/31/2001 12:08:25 PM Central Daylight Time,
a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes:

., <le si'o ce'u broda be
> mi> = <le du'u mi broda> (different "quotes" since the stuff inside is
not
> obviously Lojban).

I have not said anything even remotely like this, unless by some calamitous
typing error while tired.

{le si'o ce'u broda kei be mi} = my notion of Broda

However, I did say that when people think they want a ce'u in li'i,
what they really want is not a ce'u but a variable bound to le se li'i.

I apologize. I seem to have joined (against my intentions) the group that
have taken {li'i} into the group with {si'o} and then slid from the obscurity
about {li'i} to one about {si'o}.
But just what does "the {ce'u} is a variable bound to le se li'i" mean? The
first guess, again, is that it is just "replace {ce'u} by le se li'i," which
makes sense, but seems unduly curcuitous. Another is that it means a
variable whose range depends upon what is referred to by li se li'i -- my
experience of the dark (I don't know where the {ce'u} is supposed to go here)
is different from yours because what is unlit for me is different from for
you? I guess I need some examples with explanation.
I gather that, in fact, you don't think that {ce'u} as a lambda variable
belongs in {li'i} and that I certainly agree with. I'm less clear what you
do think belongs there, other than {zo'e} and content.
--part1_12a.3a6177e.28c15071_boundary--