From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Nov 07 16:35:01 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 8 Nov 2002 00:35:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 29480 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2002 00:35:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 8 Nov 2002 00:35:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Nov 2002 00:35:01 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 189x6z-0003BP-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:35:01 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 189x6t-0003B8-00; Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:34:55 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:34:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 189x6p-0003Ax-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:34:51 -0800 Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 16:34:51 -0800 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: importing ro Message-ID: <20021108003451.GJ22843@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20021107190944.R88073-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021107190944.R88073-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 2509 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 07:12:03PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote: > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, And Rosta wrote: > > > I had forgotten that you don't accept > > > > ro broda cu brode > > = ro da poi broda cu brode > > > > You have no grounds for saying this "is just not true", unless it is > > clearly stated in the Red Book of Woldemar. It is not a question of > > logic, it is merely a question of Lojban. Those two structures are > > equivalent if we decree they are and not equivalent if we decree > > they aren't. They are Lojban bridi, not logical formulas. > > Are you sure that refusal to accept that equation is a legitimate > possibility? Jordan has done a complete derivation of that equation from the CLL, and having read the derivation I am inclined to say that that equation is mandated by the CLL. In Ch16: 6.6) re prenu viska mi Two persons see me. is short for 6.7) re da poi prenu cu viska mi Two Xes which are-persons see me. which in turn is short for: 6.8) re da poi prenu zo'u da viska mi For-two Xes which are-persons : X sees me. Since ro is in PA, this obviously applies. I don't see that there's anything to argue about. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ http://www.lojban.org/ la lojban. jai curmi roda .einai to ku'i so'ada mukti le nu co'a darlu le'o -- RLP I'm a *male* Robin.