From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Nov 06 13:10:27 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 6 Nov 2002 21:10:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 6594 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2002 21:10:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Nov 2002 21:10:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2002 21:10:26 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 189XRS-0007x3-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 13:10:26 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 189XRP-0007wm-00; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 13:10:23 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 06 Nov 2002 13:10:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 189XRJ-0007wQ-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 06 Nov 2002 13:10:17 -0800 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gA6LFuiR062555; Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:15:56 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id gA6LFurj062554; Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:15:56 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 15:15:56 -0600 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Cc: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban] Re: So, what about le and da? (was Re: Re: What the heck is this crap?) Message-ID: <20021106211556.GA62524@allusion.net> References: <20021106205839.GK22843@digitalkingdom.org> <200211062116.QAA08985@mail2.reutershealth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200211062116.QAA08985@mail2.reutershealth.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 2466 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:02:41PM -0500, John Cowan wrote: > Robin Lee Powell scripsit: >=20 > > "mean essentially the same thing" isn't exactly a strong endorsement. >=20 > I attempted to avoid strong endorsements, just in case they turned out > to be strongly wrong. :-) >=20 > > Well, that leads to my next question: is the outer quantifier of le > > veridical (whereas the inner is not)? >=20 > So I believe; I'm not sure if the book says so. This means that ro le ci broda !=3D ci le ci broda I think this is a good thing, actually. I can say "ci" in the inner and be understood that "ro" of them is what matters, even if there is "vo". --=20 Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u sei la mark. tuen. cusku --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9yYaMDrrilS51AZ8RAh04AJ94pPntDD4bZby8z9wWfWg42CQROACeMUDs pfs89gVVH+0xZ/4KIzLFOV4= =TdGF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR--