From thanatos@dim.com Wed Feb 13 23:38:38 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: thanatos@dim.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 14 Feb 2002 07:38:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 78757 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2002 07:38:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m12.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2002 07:38:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO supernova.dimensional.com) (206.124.0.11) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Feb 2002 07:38:37 -0000 Received: from p16.3c03.pm.dimcom.net (p16.3c03.pm.dimcom.net [206.124.3.128]) by supernova.dimensional.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g1E7caX25510 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 00:38:36 -0700 (MST) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Non-logical AND in Tanru? Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 00:43:54 -0700 Message-ID: References: <3abb6uoc1mnf2duc8p03oqpqrm9epsjdqc@4ax.com> <20020210022622.GB1096@twcny.rr.com> <20020212035441.GA805@twcny.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <20020212035441.GA805@twcny.rr.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: EWC X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=45881577 X-Yahoo-Profile: thandim2000 Are these statements not nearly identical in meaning? (aside from the special rule for observatives) 1. ta melbi je nixli ckule 2. ta ckule co melbi je nixli 3. melbi je nixli co ckule befa ta If they are, then I don't think I should be rebuked too harshly for arguing from the assumption that "That is a pretty school and also for girls" was a valid interpretation of #1. There was a half-page saying that many different interpretations were possible, after all. I took that to a logical conclusion, I think, not relying on English intuition. Arguing from a false assumption can get you anywhere. :) --=20 EWC