Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 20:32:36 EST

In a message dated 2/18/2002 5:29:05 PM Central Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> We seem to have at least four different interpretations of
> x1 and x4 of fancu:
> 
> xod: x1 is a name and x4 is the function
> cowan: x1 is the function and x4 is an expression (a text)
> lojbab: x1 is the function and x4 is something like li f(x)=x*2,
> which is not very clear what it is because equations
> are not numbers.
> pc: x1=x4 both are the function, with the proviso that good style
> requires to use a more helpful description in x4.
> 
> I much prefer pc's version over any of the others, although even
> better for me would be to drop x4 altoghether.
> 

Why, thanks; I needed a pleasant surprise.
So, leave off fancu4 and put it in, when needed (as often) in subordinate 
clauses.