From pycyn@aol.com Sun Sep 29 13:07:57 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 29 Sep 2002 20:07:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 21105 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2002 20:07:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Sep 2002 20:07:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m06.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.161) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Sep 2002 20:07:57 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.7a.2d933edb (4320) for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:07:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <7a.2d933edb.2ac8b798@aol.com> Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:07:52 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] sticky hypothesis To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_7a.2d933edb.2ac8b798_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_7a.2d933edb.2ac8b798_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/29/2002 9:53:23 AM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: << > I think you want {ru'a} not {da'i} for this. > >>Assuming that the English is at least somewhat on track, {ru'a}, "I postulate" is very different from {da'i} "supposing." Postulation is usually part of an explanation and evidentials are use to indicate the source of something you are claiming. Supposing, on the other hand, is not claiming anything (it is the opposite -- on the list -- of "in fact') and is being explicitly used for tentative or experimental investigations. It seems to be what is wanted for indirect proofs, for example, which seems to be what is involved here. The un{da'i} is {da'inao} not {ki}, probably. --part1_7a.2d933edb.2ac8b798_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/29/2002 9:53:23 AM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:

<<

I think you want {ru'a} not {da'i} for this.

>>Assuming that the English is at least somewhat on track, {ru'a}, "I postulate" is very different from {da'i} "supposing." Postulation is usually part of an explanation and evidentials are use to indicate the source of something you are claiming. Supposing, on the other hand, is not claiming anything (it is the opposite -- on the list -- of "in fact') and is being explicitly used for tentative or experimental investigations. It seems to be what is wanted for indirect proofs, for example, which seems to be what is involved here.

The un{da'i} is {da'inao} not {ki}, probably.

--part1_7a.2d933edb.2ac8b798_boundary--