From cowan@ccil.org Thu Feb 28 20:01:39 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: cowan@mercury.ccil.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 1 Mar 2002 04:01:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 75610 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2002 04:01:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m10.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2002 04:01:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mercury.ccil.org) (192.190.237.100) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2002 04:01:39 -0000 Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16geEx-0004ve-00 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:01:51 -0500 Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies In-Reply-To: <12f.d394ae5.29b0218c@aol.com> from "pycyn@aol.com" at "Feb 28, 2002 07:13:00 pm" To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:01:51 -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: > Then what the fatal fandango is the way to refer to the letter "a"? Or the > numeral "1", to get back to the point? me'o .abu and me'o pa respectively. > 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? You have to use a MEX to express the numeral "1", being a degenerate case of an unevaluated expression. It's degenerate only in the sense of having no operators. If it were evaluated, it would be the number 1, which is written "li pa". > 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? Things with "bu" are letters or symbols. You *could* use pabu for the character "1" (as distinct from the numeral "1"); I merely said that there is no authoritative rule to that effect. > 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". I don't think of n' as applying a function; it's just a name that happens to be typographically a little odd. Using ny. .y'y.bu is fine too. -- 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_