From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Sep 26 16:46:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 26 Sep 2001 23:46:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 39407 invoked from network); 26 Sep 2001 23:46:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Sep 2001 23:46:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.4) by mta2 with SMTP; 26 Sep 2001 23:46:43 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 16:46:41 -0700 Received: from 200.69.11.110 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 23:46:40 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.69.11.110] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Set of answers encore Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 23:46:40 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Sep 2001 23:46:41.0090 (UTC) FILETIME=[7D8C8220:01C146E5] From: "Jorge Llambias" la and cusku di'e >Another example: > >John believes that Bill's age is the cube root of 389017. > >... when John has the thought "It is the case that Bill is 73". I think we should distinguish the two claims: (1) la djan krici le du'u la bil se nanca le tenfa be li 389017 bei li 1/3 (2) la djan krici le du'u le se nanca be la bil cu tenfa li 389017 li 1/3 In (1), John's belief is about the {nanca} relationship, in (2) it is about the {tenfa} relationship. In neither it's about both. Whether or not {le tenfa be li 389017 bei li 1/3} is a good way or not to refer to {li 73} is up to the speaker, and has nothing to do with John's beliefs in (1). mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp