Subject: Re: [lojban] utterances

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 13:33:54 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 [email-masked] wrote:

> In a message dated 2002-02-01 4:26:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [email-masked] writes:
>
>
> > The problem, I think,
> > comes from seeing '.ui' as an utterance just because it is audible. You can
> > hear a sigh, but it is not an utterance. '.ui' is like that.
> >
> > --la kreig.daniyl.
> >
>
> then what IS a sigh, if not an utterance? how do you define 'utterance'?
> steven lytle

Given the sacred axiom that UI has no truth value, every surrounding
definition will be distorted to maintain the faith. First "proposition",
and now "utterance".

-- 
The tao that can be tar(1)ed
is not the entire Tao.
The path that can be specified
is not the Full Path.