From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Tue Oct 30 08:44:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 30 Oct 2001 16:44:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 20275 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 16:43:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Oct 2001 16:43:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta1 with SMTP; 30 Oct 2001 16:43:44 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:20:10 +0000 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:54:40 +0000 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:54:11 +0000 To: jcowan , lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] a construal of lo'e & le'e Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin >>> John Cowan 10/30/01 04:17pm >>> #And Rosta wrote: #> Well, Jorge has shown why that's false. We need to change it in order fo= r it=20 #> to make the point you want: #>=20 #> lo djacu pa mei cu du lo djacu re mei #>=20 #> and this I would say is TRUE. Whereas, #>=20 #> lo remna pa mei cu du lo remna re mei #>=20 #> is false. # #What about joined ("Siamese") twins? Sometimes the question "One human #or two?" just may not make that much sense. Ritta-Christina, notably, #had two heads and torsos, four arms, a single pelvis, two legs, and #{veju'o} the Catholic Church, two souls. She/they died at age 5, #probably from exhaustion due to excessive exposure to crowds. # #Under a related epistemology, we are told that husband and wife #"make one flesh". For any defined category we can find problematic cases around the margins. So yes, "one human or two" can sometimes be a tricky question, but "one djacu or two" is a meaningless one.=20 On a slightly different point, I am willing to grant you that la ritakristin cu remna could be true even if=20 la ritakristina cu remna pa mei is not. However, if I do grant you that, then I am not willing to grant that re da remna means "there are exactly two people", given that "remna" would not mean "is one person". ---And.