From ragnarok@pobox.com Wed Mar 05 18:16:49 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_1); 6 Mar 2003 02:16:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 43318 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2003 02:16:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Mar 2003 02:16:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Mar 2003 02:16:49 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 18qkwC-0006Al-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:16:48 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18qkw5-0006AS-00; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:16:41 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:16:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18qkvx-0006AI-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:16:33 -0800 Received: from craig [209.42.200.67] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id AF5AD41E0050; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 21:15:54 -0500 To: Subject: [lojban] Re: The Any thread Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 21:15:59 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3E6695FC.5090704@bilkent.edu.tr> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.200.67] X-archive-position: 4386 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ragnarok@pobox.com Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "Craig" Reply-To: ragnarok@pobox.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> But, doctors do exist, and if they didn't there wouldn't be one I don't >> need. And claims that the existence of a specific doctor that I don't need >> falsifies my reading of "mi nitcu lo mikce", but I claim the existence of a >> specific doctor that I do need would falsify it, and e is just >> misinterpreting. >No, you can need something that doesn't exist. I need the doctor to exist, and I need a doctor. I can't need the doctor if the doctor is nonexistant. However, if I need a specific doctor, I claim that that is not "mi nitcu lo mikce" but "mi nitcu la mic.rod." (I need Dr Foo) or whatever. I will concede that technically, it wouldn't be worng to say "mi nitcu lo mikce" for "mi nitcu la mic.rod." but it would be uncommunicative in most cases. However, I maintain that "mi nitcu lo mikce" is correct for "I need a doctor" in the Any sense. >BTW, "doctor" is not a good translation for "mikce", since the latter >also includes nurses, paramedics etc. The question was originally how to say "I need a doctor." A nurse, paramedic, etc is qualified to fill my need in many cases, so mikce works. But the BTW you should have used is probably that "mikce" isn't a perfect translation of "doctor".