From pycyn@aol.com Mon Oct 08 08:55:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 8 Oct 2001 15:55:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 29982 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2001 15:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by 10.1.1.222 with QMQP; 8 Oct 2001 15:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d04.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.36) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Oct 2001 15:55:18 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id r.fc.d3f9b4d (26120) for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 11:55:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 11:55:10 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: noxemol ce'u To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_fc.d3f9b4d.28f3265e_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_fc.d3f9b4d.28f3265e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/8/2001 9:50:43 AM Central Daylight Time, arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes: > . I just don't see how debate > can possibly be fruitful if we can't even agree that "le selbri be KOhA" is > not a bridi. > Is *that* an issue? It's news to me. I thought the issue was whether {selbri be KOhA} was a bridi or BRIDI or whatever. That is, whether {le selbri be KOhA} contained a bridi. And, of course, just what the criteria for containing a bridi are. --part1_fc.d3f9b4d.28f3265e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/8/2001 9:50:43 AM Central Daylight Time, arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes:

. I just don't see how debate
can possibly be fruitful if we can't even agree that "le selbri be KOhA" is
not a bridi.

Is *that* an issue? It's news to me. I thought the issue was whether {selbri be KOhA} was a bridi or BRIDI or whatever. That is, whether {le selbri be KOhA} contained a bridi. And, of course, just what the criteria for containing a bridi are. --part1_fc.d3f9b4d.28f3265e_boundary--