From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Sep 18 17:10:02 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 19 Sep 2002 00:10:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 46374 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2002 00:10:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Sep 2002 00:10:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.147) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Sep 2002 00:10:01 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 17:10:01 -0700 Received: from 200.69.6.27 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 00:10:00 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] lo'e, le'e, tu'o Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 00:10:00 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Sep 2002 00:10:01.0038 (UTC) FILETIME=[E5745EE0:01C25F70] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.69.6.27] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la and cusku di'e >It seems to me that what is essentially >going on in these exx -- and also generally with generic >reference -- is that a category is being conceptualized as >a single individual ("myopic singularization"). E.g. it is >quite easy to think of Chocolate as a single individual, >and "I like chocolate" means the same as "I like Chocolate". Yes, definitely. I think "myopic sigularization" is a very good description of what goes on. If you start from the point of view of seeing the category in its extension, then {lo'e} collapses the extension into one individual. If you start from the intension, then {lo'e} simply blocks the move to the extension. I don't think this conflicts with the description in terms of the kairbroda predicates. >So on this basis I understand your use of {lo'e} and agree >with it. The question that remains in my mind is whether >there is a difference between {lo'e broda} and {tu'o broda}. I can't see any difference. >BTW, this automatically gives us a useful meaning for >{le'e} -- it would mean {(ro) le pa}. Don't you mean {tu'o le tu'o}? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com