From gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch Fri Feb 28 13:08:01 2003
Return-Path: <lojban-out@lojban.org>
X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 28 Feb 2003 21:08:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 10782 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2003 21:08:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Feb 2003 21:08:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Feb 2003 21:08:00 -0000
Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12)
  id 18orjc-0005JS-00
  for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:08:00 -0800
Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain)
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
  id 18orjK-0005J9-00; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:07:42 -0800
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:07:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail4.bluewin.ch ([195.186.4.74])
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
  id 18orjC-0005Iy-00
  for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:07:35 -0800
Received: from oemcomputer (62.202.164.237) by mail4.bluewin.ch (Bluewin AG 6.7.015)
  id 3E1046D9005CDA8C for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 21:07:03 +0000
Message-ID: <011301c2df6d$2a747620$669dca3e@oemcomputer>
To: <lojban-list@lojban.org>
References: <20030228143330.H4979-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Any (was: Nick will be with you shortly)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 22:04:23 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-archive-position: 4242
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch
Precedence: bulk
X-list: lojban-list
From: "G. Dyke" <gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch>
Reply-To: gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=81437350
X-Yahoo-Profile: gregvdyke

xod:

> Chapter six makes it clear to me that lo is used for, and only for
> non-specific descriptions. I think we can filter out stupid choices for da
> with context. For instance, a dead doctor is nonetheless lo mikce, but I
> don't want a corpse giving me a checkup. So, I think that da is
> nonspecific across members of the set that's been filtered for ridiculous
> values.

How can a dead doctor be a "lo mikce"? It's like saying that bush is a "lo
verba"

lo morsi ke purji mikce cu mikce noda node

mu'o mi'e greg





