From pycyn@aol.com Sun Nov 11 06:36:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 11 Nov 2001 14:36:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 46839 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 14:36:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m5.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Nov 2001 14:36:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m08.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.163) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Nov 2001 14:36:14 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id r.c6.181862c (4554) for ; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 09:36:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 09:36:09 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] observatives & a construal of lo'e & le'e To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c6.181862c.291fe6d9_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_c6.181862c.291fe6d9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/11/2001 12:33:17 AM Central Standard Time, rob@twcny.rr.com writes: > You want {la} to mean "the prototype"? Recall that most people want to > use Lojban not for talking about Lojban, but for talking about other > things. {la cinfo} means "that which is named Lion", and it may very > well not be a lion. You'll just have to deal with the fact that names > don't fit anywhere into logic. > > If my name were Bob Dole, I would be {la bab.dol.} but I would not be > the prototypical Bob Dole, and I would very much resent your effort to > make my name not refer to me anymore. > Not quite what I said. If you want to talk about the prototype lion, then {la cinfo} is a good way to do it - "the thing I call 'cinfo'" The fact that And's view also has each individual being a prototype of that individuals various manifestations helps. Of course, this is not the only use of {la} and it only refers to a prototype if it is combined in the context with a variety of characteristic uses of {le} and {mela} and so on. But this is always true of these metaphysocal chats -- we know what {loi} and {lo'e} and the like mean (metaphysically) by seeing how they relate to other terms. --part1_c6.181862c.291fe6d9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 11/11/2001 12:33:17 AM Central Standard Time, rob@twcny.rr.com writes:


You want {la} to mean "the prototype"? Recall that most people want to
use Lojban not for talking about Lojban, but for talking about other
things. {la cinfo} means "that which is named Lion", and it may very
well not be a lion. You'll just have to deal with the fact that names
don't fit anywhere into logic.

If my name were Bob Dole, I would be {la bab.dol.} but I would not be
the prototypical Bob Dole, and I would very much resent your effort to
make my name not refer to me anymore.


Not quite what I said.  If you want to talk about the prototype lion, then {la cinfo} is a good way to do it -  "the thing I call 'cinfo'"  The fact that And's view also has each individual being a prototype of that individuals various manifestations helps.  Of course, this is not the only use of {la} and it only refers to a prototype if it is combined in the context with a variety of characteristic uses of {le} and {mela} and so on.  But this is always true of these metaphysocal chats -- we know what {loi} and {lo'e} and the like mean (metaphysically) by seeing how they relate to other terms. --part1_c6.181862c.291fe6d9_boundary--