From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri Feb 28 16:33:20 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 1 Mar 2003 00:33:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 1532 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2003 00:33:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2003 00:33:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2003 00:33:19 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 18ouwJ-0007ZA-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:33:19 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18ouw9-0007Yq-00; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:33:09 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:33:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18ouvz-0007Yc-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:33:00 -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 h210dabE032859 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 18:39:36 -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 h210dZMd032858 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 18:39:35 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 18:39:35 -0600 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Any (was: Nick will be with you shortly) Message-ID: <20030301003935.GA32533@allusion.net> References: <20030228191121.GZ17252@digitalkingdom.org> <20030228141257.M4979-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030228141257.M4979-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-archive-position: 4247 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 --r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 02:21:58PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote: > On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Robin Lee Powell wrote: >=20 > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 02:04:55PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote: > > > On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 01:42:33PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote: [...] > > > "mi nitcu da. Let's start with that. Do you at least agree that there > > > isn't a specific thing which I mean that I need? > > > > And as I said to Craig, no, I don't. I agree that there exists some > > thing that you need. The scope of your need is still undefined. >=20 > What can I say? It's wrong. Using da to mean something that you have in > mind would make da specific. And it would make lo specific. But lo is not > specific. I think even Jordan would agree with this; he once tried to > convince me that even when da was limited to refer to a single item, it > STILL isn't specific! I agree with robin, except for his terminology. It's specific under the way you are saying specific, but it is not +specific in the way that "le" is. So. "da viska mi" means "there is something which sees me". And even if the speaker knows *which* thing sees them, they can still make this nonspecific claim. How can you tell it is nonspecific? Because a legitimate response to "Something sees me" is "Yeah, but *what* sees you?". If I had instead said "the dog sees me", you cannot respond that way, because I just told you (instead you would have to say "which dog sees you" (or {le ki'a gerku})). This should maybe help explain, btw, that discussion we had eariler about whether da is specific when it is limited to a single thing (da besna mi, etc). --=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 --r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+YAFHDrrilS51AZ8RAg8vAKDA6NGp9RCc4i9eZyjCj2zdygnLNgCfajXE yfQIdOjW89TJxNQEFxrg86Q= =cO7r -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3--