From pycyn@aol.com Sat Mar 09 01:34:38 2002
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: unknown); 9 Mar 2002 09:34:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 63005 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2002 09:34:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167)
  by m9.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Mar 2002 09:34:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m03.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.6)
  by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Mar 2002 09:34:37 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com
  by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.81.18bb9496 (18557)
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sat, 9 Mar 2002 04:34:34 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <81.18bb9496.29bb312a@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 04:34:34 EST
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] Quantifiers, Existential Import, and all that stuff
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_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_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 3/8/2002 10:02:24 AM Central Standard Time, 
jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


> ><A- ro [lo ro] broda
> >E- no [lo ro] broda
> >I+ su'o [lo ro] broda = su'o lo su'o broda
> >O+ me'iro [lo ro] broda = me'iro lo su'o broda
> >
> >A+ ro lo su'o broda
> >E+ no lo su'o broda
> >I- naku no lo su'o broda
> >O- naku ro lo su'o broda
> 

I wish you'd make up your mind whether it is the things with internal {su'o} 
that are + or the things that are internal {ro}, the shifting back and forth 
makes this hard to follow without constantly checking the list again, which 
is more effort than crazinesses deserves. But, if {su'o broda cu brode} = 
{su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} then {naku su'o broda cu brode} must be also 
{naku su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} . But one of these is patently - and the 
other + or else the principle here is totally arbitrary (i.e., no principle 
at all). Or maybe there is one but it is so far from Lojban and logic, that 
I just can't see it. I do wish you would explain how it works (on loccan3, 
perhaps).

--part1_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2>In a message dated 3/8/2002 10:02:24 AM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt;&lt;A- ro [lo ro] broda<BR>
&gt;E- no [lo ro] broda<BR>
&gt;I+ su'o [lo ro] broda = su'o lo su'o broda<BR>
&gt;O+ me'iro [lo ro] broda = me'iro lo su'o broda<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&gt;A+ ro lo su'o broda<BR>
&gt;E+ no lo su'o broda<BR>
&gt;I- naku no lo su'o broda<BR>
&gt;O- naku ro lo su'o broda<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
I wish you'd make up your mind&nbsp; whether it is the things with internal {su'o} that are + or the things that are internal {ro}, the shifting back and forth makes this hard to follow without constantly checking the list again, which is more effort than crazinesses deserves.&nbsp; But, if&nbsp; {su'o broda cu brode} = {su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} then {naku su'o broda cu brode} must be also {naku su'o lo su'o broda cu brode} .&nbsp; But one of these is patently - and the other + or else the principle here is totally arbitrary (i.e., no principle at all).&nbsp; Or maybe there is one but it is so far from Lojban and logic, that I just can't see it.&nbsp; I do wish you would explain how it works (on loccan3, perhaps).</FONT></HTML>

--part1_81.18bb9496.29bb312a_boundary--

