From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Wed Oct 31 08:02:56 2001
Return-Path: <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>
X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 31 Oct 2001 16:02:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 36965 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 16:02:43 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
  by 10.1.1.220 with QMQP; 31 Oct 2001 16:02:43 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3)
  by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Oct 2001 16:02:42 -0000
Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer);
  Wed, 31 Oct 2001 15:39:13 +0000
Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk
  with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 16:13:44 +0000
Message-Id: <sbe02338.069@gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 16:13:28 +0000
To: rob <rob@twcny.rr.com>, lojban <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] observatives & 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 <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin

Rob:
#On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 08:20:43PM -0500, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
#> <Right. A normal-zo'e x1 in main bridi cannot be elided. Where normal-zo=
'e
#> =3D zo'e with its normal meaning.>
#>=20
#> Since the normal meaning of {zo'e} (if that locution has any sense at al=
l) is=20
#> "the obvious thing," the observative use seem perfectly normal. Contex=
t may=20
#> force the "currently observed" meaning or some other, just as it always =
does.
#
#Okay, I finally figured out the sides of the argument here, and am a bit
#surprised to find myself on pycyn's side.
#
#And: your ideas about {zo'e} seem to arise from treating the observative
#as a special case. Why is this necessary?

Treating the observative as a special case is precisely what I object to.
If it is not treated as a special case then there is no observative convent=
ion;
there is just the one rule for interpreting zo'e reagrdless of its environm=
ent
and of whether it is elided. I don't want there to be an observative
convention; I want there to be just the single general rule. This thread=20
began by my asking whether there really was this observative convention,
since I had thought there was just the single general rule.

--And.