Subject: Re: [lojban] "generic Odysseys"

From: And Rosta <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:31:45 +0000

>>> John Cowan <[email-masked]> 11/12/01 08:50pm >>>
#And Rosta wrote:
#> I would see "prenrmaiklu" as equivalent to "me la maiky'elsym"
#> (assuming that the referent of "la maiky'elsym" has been fixed as
#> "Michael Helsem") and the question is what gadri to prefix to these to 
#> come out with something that determinately refers to Michael Helsem.
#> To my mind, the right gadri would be "lo'e", the gadri to use when a
#> category is being viewed as singleton,
#
#While this is not wrong, it seems overcomplex relative to "lo", given
#that lo ro prenrmaiklu = lo pa prenrmaiklu in fact.

Were that the case, I would accept that "lo" and "lo'e" are equivalent(ish),
but I'm not assuming that lo ro prenrmaiklu = lo pa prenrmaiklu -- lo'i
prenrmaiklu might contain Yestermichael, Morrowmichael, The grumpy
morning Michael, and so on, just as lo'i me la xamlet might contain
Folio Hamlet and Quarto Hamlet.

#> while "le" would mean
#> "each of certain specific versions of Michael Helsem".
#
#It might also mean the in-mind Michael Helsem. If you recall,
#I once praised the acting of le prenrdjekniklsyn in _Much Ado
#About Nothing_, meaning in fact lo prenrmaiklkiton.

Well, to be fully longwinded, "le" would mean "each of certain specific
things that I describe as (but do not claim to be) (versions of) Michael
Helsem". When you praised the acting of "le prenrdjekniklsyn", you
would, had you used that phrase, have referred to "each of certain
specific things that you described as (but did not claim are) (versions
of) Jack Nicholson".

--And.