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

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 19:13:00 EST

In a message dated 2/28/2002 1:39:07 PM Central Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> Abstractly speaking, yes. But in terms of syntax, "abu" is a
> pronoun (outside MEX) and can't be used for the letter "a".
> Inside ordinary MEX it is a variable, still not the letter "a".
> 

Then what the fatal fandango is the way to refer to the letter "a"? Or the 
numeral "1", to get back to the point?

<Why not? It's a degenerate case, to be sure.>

Well, it sems to be evaluated (to 1, in fact), but, having used and defended 
some degenerate cases of equations before, I suppose I have to let this one 
go as well. So, what is the numeral "1" OUTSIDE MEX?

<It is not yet defined to mean anything in particular.>

Not even the "1" key on a keyboard? Like all those other guys that are 
something with a {bu} tucked on the end? No system at all?

<<I Lojban... in general {n?} define to how ask even won?t>I would write n, 
n', n'', ... as ny. ny.bu ny.bubu ...
(People who say "n double prime" should be dissected!)>

I see, no system at all. Why {bu} of all things. And, I suspect this a 
device for getting more {n}s, whatever they do, not the representation of the 
application of the function represented by "'" to the number represented by 
"n".
Aside from having no way to say "prime" in Lojban (the missing system strikes 
again) , what is wrong with the short, accurate -- and easily counted -- 
"double prime" and so on? It sure beats sounding like a three-week-old -- 
or, more likely, the parent of one.