From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Nov 07 16:43:24 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 00:43:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 64117 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2002 00:43:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 8 Nov 2002 00:43:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Nov 2002 00:43:24 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 189xF5-0003Ho-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:43:23 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 189xF1-0003HX-00; Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:43:19 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:43:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 189xEx-0003HO-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:43:15 -0800 Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 16:43:15 -0800 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: importing ro Message-ID: <20021108004315.GC22931@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: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 2511 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 Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 12:38:58AM -0000, And Rosta wrote: > xod: > > 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 > > It's legitimate by simple logical and linguistic criteria. Is it? That seems to me like debating that All As is equivalent to All Xs such that X is an A Debating that equivalence seems amazingly non-sensical to me. In fact, that is exactly how I was tought to convert natural-language sentences with 'all' in them into predicate logic, IIRC. -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.