From xod@sixgirls.org Tue Dec 18 15:49:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@reva.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 18 Dec 2001 23:49:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 37680 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 23:49:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2001 23:49:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO reva.sixgirls.org) (216.27.131.50) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2001 23:49:29 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by reva.sixgirls.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fBINnSK27867 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:49:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:49:27 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Re: [lojban] Logical translation request In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20011218021856.00c40680@pop.cais.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1138703 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote: > At 12:14 AM 12/18/01 -0500, Rob Speer wrote: > > >Is there any particular reason for this? Similarly, for the CAhA selma'o > >and the fact that CAhA + NAI is ungrammatical? > > Probably it is ungrammatical either because a) we never thought of adding a > rule for CAhA+NAI because we couldn't think of what such a thing might > mean This seems to bias s-w effects, doesn't it? -- The tao that can be tar(1)ed is not the entire Tao. The path that can be specified is not the Full Path.