From pycyn@aol.com Fri May 26 09:14:06 2000
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
Received: (qmail 3886 invoked from network); 26 May 2000 16:14:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 26 May 2000 16:14:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo14.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.4) by mta3 with SMTP; 26 May 2000 16:14:05 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id a.ce.5e60d0c (3950) for <lojban@egroups.com>; Fri, 26 May 2000 12:13:59 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <ce.5e60d0c.265ffcc6@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 12:13:58 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] coi rodo - mi'e .aulun.
To: lojban@egroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 41
From: pycyn@aol.com

Ah, the old jokes are the best jokes and jokes where mystics best logicians 
at logic are the best (and oldest) of all. I am not sure that this one will 
come out too well in Lojban -- it may depend on how you understand Chuang's 
argument. If you take it as a contrast between "by what means" and "from 
what place." as one English version has it, then it surely won't. But this 
version takes it as about the presuppositions of a "how" question and so 
should work, regardless of what translation for "how" is used. And that is 
the cleverer "logical" ploy.
I used to snarl at anyone who started their translating career with Laotze or 
Shakespeare, but at least this piece of Chuang & Hui seems feasible.
>|83

