From pycyn@aol.com Thu Feb 14 06:31:05 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 14 Feb 2002 14:31:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 40853 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2002 14:31:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2002 14:31:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d10.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.42) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Feb 2002 14:31:04 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.17f.3903b2d (2615) for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:30:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <17f.3903b2d.299d240b@aol.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:30:35 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Non-logical AND in Tanru? To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_17f.3903b2d.299d240b_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_17f.3903b2d.299d240b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/13/2002 9:46:55 PM Central Standard Time, thanatos@dim.com writes: > Maybe it would be good to also use "" to enclose s-sumti and > {} to represent l-sumti. > The historical usage, since around the 17th century, has been to enclose s-sumti in quotes to refer to them, the unquoted for already refers to the thing iself, so needs no help. See above: the word itself refers to its referent (naturally). The word, the referent of {mi} is mi or me. --part1_17f.3903b2d.299d240b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/13/2002 9:46:55 PM Central Standard Time, thanatos@dim.com writes:


Maybe it would be good to also use "" to enclose s-sumti and
{} to represent l-sumti.


The historical usage, since around the 17th century, has been to enclose s-sumti in quotes to refer to them, the unquoted for already refers to the thing iself, so needs no help.

<Ah, I meant to be doing that. ;)  If we can't refer in English to the
l-sumti by quoting the s-sumti, then how else are we to do it?>

See above: the word itself refers to its referent (naturally).

<If I quote "mi" do I mean the word "mi" or the
thing referred to by "mi" in the text?>

The word, the referent of {mi} is mi or me.

 --part1_17f.3903b2d.299d240b_boundary--