From pycyn@aol.com Tue Mar 05 10:01:58 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 5 Mar 2002 18:01:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 62106 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2002 22:04:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m10.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Mar 2002 22:04:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d04.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.36) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 2002 22:04:23 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.131.9c8d9e9 (2616) for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 17:04:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <131.9c8d9e9.29b54961@aol.com> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 17:04:17 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Letteral, letter words and symbols. To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_131.9c8d9e9.29b54961_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_131.9c8d9e9.29b54961_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/4/2002 2:30:40 PM Central Standard Time, arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes: > Am I deluded through overhasting reading, or is this not what Jorge & John > were saying all along & you were disputing? > I'd rather say "questioning" because I was trying to make a coherent use-mention-free system out of it. It can't be done apparently, so we accept it as being marginally better than English and let it go --it'll rarely cause trouble and we have ways to sort it out when it does. Jorge at least doesn't like the way I've put it even now and keeps coming up with stranger and stranger ways to save the bacon. And, of course, the last bit isn't right at all: my parsers are defective, since they just accepted {la cu gancu} which just won't work by anyone's guesstimation, for anyhting. Lord knows what the parser thinks it is. --part1_131.9c8d9e9.29b54961_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/4/2002 2:30:40 PM Central Standard Time, arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes:


Am I deluded through overhasting reading, or is this not what Jorge & John
were saying all along & you were disputing?

I'd rather say "questioning" because I was trying to make a coherent use-mention-free system out of it.  It can't be done apparently, so we accept it as being marginally better than English and let it go --it'll rarely cause trouble and we have ways to sort it out when it does.  Jorge at least doesn't like the way I've put it even now and keeps coming up with stranger and stranger ways to save the bacon.
And, of course, the last bit isn't right at all: my parsers are defective, since they just accepted {la cu gancu} which just won't work by anyone's guesstimation, for anyhting.  Lord knows what the parser thinks it is.
--part1_131.9c8d9e9.29b54961_boundary--