From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Tue Nov 13 05:19:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 13 Nov 2001 13:19:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 38421 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 13:19:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m12.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Nov 2001 13:19:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Nov 2001 13:19:54 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:56:05 +0000 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:32:01 +0000 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:31:45 +0000 To: lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] "generic Odysseys" 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 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=20 #> 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 =3D 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 =3D 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.