Subject: Re: [lojban] Set of answers encore

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 23:06:36

la pycyn cusku di'e

>Well, ideally, ask him "Is Bill the cube root of 389017 years old?"

Is that meant to be:

1- xu la bil nanca le tenfa be li 389017 bei li 1/3
2- xu le se nanca be la bil cu tenfa li 389017 li 1/3
3- xu da se nanca la bil gi'e tenfa li 389017 li 1/3

They are three different questions which test three different
possible beliefs. And when reporting the answer, do I have to
use the same description for every gismu in order to report
faithfully, or am I allowed to use a different description
with the same referent?

>I would
>count "Say what?" or "I have no idea what the cube root of whatever you 
>said
>is" and so on as effective "no"s , indicating that such was not his belief.

I see. So to you, {le broda} inside a du'u in x2 of krici is
not the speaker's description, but the believer's? Just as with {lu}?
Or does it have to be both the speaker's and the believer's
description? I have always taken {le broda} to be the speaker's
description only, no matter how embedded, as long as it is not
within quotes. To me {le pa broda} can always be substituted by
another description with the same referent and the truth value
doesn't change. You're saying this is not the case, right?
And the same goes for names? Names within a du'u are not what
the speaker calls their referents, but what the "owner" of the
du'u calls them? I don't like it.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp