From graywyvern@hotmail.com Wed Sep 12 18:33:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: graywyvern@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_1); 13 Sep 2001 01:33:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 79763 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 01:32:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Sep 2001 01:32:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.237.80) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Sep 2001 01:32:56 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:32:41 -0700 Received: from 65.67.96.113 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:32:40 GMT X-Originating-IP: [65.67.96.113] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: si'o [was: Re: [lojban] Re: lojbabbitry a (ce'u) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:32:40 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Sep 2001 01:32:41.0000 (UTC) FILETIME=[FA914280:01C13BF3] From: "michael helsem" >From: Nick NICHOLAS li'o >Saying >si'o is what goes into the x1 of sidbo is lamely circular, in any case. >Without concrete examples (is Communism a si'o? Is pleasure? Is going to >the store? Is me going to the Starbucks coffeehouse at 11:05 AM, last >Monday?), li'o >The same goes for si'o: >if not all "ideas/concepts" are either propositional (du'u) or >experiential (li'i), for God's sake give me a specific counterexample, not >an alternate reality, or Lao Tze's Gedankenexperiment of being a butterfly. I think the polysemy of the English word "idea" seriously interferes with our use of SIDBO (x1 is an idea/concept/thought about x2 by thinker x3). For instance, there are conventional topics of discourse, SLABU SE CASNU; there are personal opinions SE JINVI; there are general mental phenomena (however you define them), which might be said to fall under the rubric of XANRI; & then there are ideas in the technical-philosophical sense of "concepts", or PENSI SEPI'O DA. Are all of these SIDBO? Should we use every other formulation in preference to this ill-defined gismu? Or should we settle on the one least covered by the others? I find it useful to use LESI'O for either the first one, or else maybe LO'E...but if i have ever confused these with the last one, i sincerely regret it, since i really wanted LA- something: this is a name, a figurehead on a ship, but not not not an algorithm, say. ("Freedom", "Brotherhood"..."Colorless Greenness".) Do i feel that there is a difference between LEKA BRODA & LESI'O BRODA? Yes, if only because CKAJI has a place less than SIDBO. Does DU'U or NU cover everything i might want to say in Lojban? (I could always revert to the gismu; & probably for precise discourse combine them with anaphora.) Probably. I have to admit i haven't been able to follow all the JARKI JE KRUVI discussion of LESI'O LA'E ZO CE'U...i still tend to think of it as an alternative way of phrasing, just as KE'A can be dispensed with if you twist the expression around a bit; & not, something so essential you have to include it in every subordinate expression or give a reason why not. I guess i want to say: even though we want logical perfection right now & fully airtight so the pretensions of Lojban can be realized at last, the truth is, this does depend on the development of Lojbanic psychology & this is a long, long way from happening yet. CO'OMI'E MAIKL. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp