Subject: Re: lojban as a programming language [was Re: [lojban] Lojban for lay programmers]

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 21:02:21

la xod cusku di'e

>We actually had a discussion about this a while ago. It revolved around
>the question: does lu'e la djan mean " "John" ", or "a symbol for "John"";
>is it the symbol, or does it mean the symbol?

The choice probably was between the symbol "John" or any other
symbol for the person John. A symbol for the name "John" would
be referred to as lu'e zo djan.

>In Lojban, I think ci'i gets treated just like any other member of selma'o
>pa. And I find that refreshing.

Sintactically, yes. Semantically, no.

{pacipa} follows the same grammar as {paci'ipa}, but the
meanings are quite different. The first is 1E2+3E1+1E0.
The second I don't know what it is, but it is probably
not 1E2+ci'iE1+1E0.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx