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

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 15:32:19 EST

In a message dated 3/3/2002 10:43:46 AM Central Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> And you wouldn't want {abu ly ibu cy ebu} to evaluate, so you'd put a
> {me'o} in front.
> 

No, I wouldn't, because all the examples I have (the Refgram, 17.2.1, 2) do 
without the {me'o}. You can say that spelling is a special context or you 
can say that the Refgram screwed this up worse, but it still does it this way 
and I would follow it.

<A lerfu or lerfu string on its own is a pronoun. Always.

> No, {a} is a sumti conjunction, {ai} is in UI, {n} is not a Lojban 
> expression.

You're having fun mixing up levels, aren't you? Fine: any string of BY,
including (any selma'o)+BU, which appears outside of mekso, is a
pronoun, and so it refers to the referent of the pronoun. Do you agree
with this?>

No level mixing, just the issue of what refers to what -- that is use-mention 
confusion on a general level. But, yes, it is fun to catch someone in it. I 
do almost agree with what you say, except for spelling and 17.2.3 (and the 
implications of 17.10.6)