From cowan@ccil.org Mon Feb 18 15:55:35 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: cowan@mercury.ccil.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 18 Feb 2002 23:55:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 71501 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2002 23:55:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m9.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Feb 2002 23:55:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mercury.ccil.org) (192.190.237.100) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Feb 2002 23:55:34 -0000 Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16cxdH-0002gS-00 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:55:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies In-Reply-To: <185.3c6c3e1.29a26e8c@aol.com> from "pycyn@aol.com" at "Feb 18, 2002 09:49:48 am" To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:55:43 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=212516 X-Yahoo-Profile: johnwcowan pycyn@aol.com scripsit: > Literally? That is, {lu ...... li'u}? That works for me, although the phrase "expression/rule" indicates that greater flexibility is probably OK as well. > Or {le du'u makau .... ce'u}? For > the latter is a function, that is, the name of a function so representing a > function in the text, and so not an expression. I need a particular example here to understand. There are certainly sumti of this form that don't refer to functions: "what John is looking at" is a screen, not a function. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all. There are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful. --_The Hobbit_