From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Fri Jun 09 00:43:59 2000
Return-Path: <Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de>
Received: (qmail 8854 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2000 07:43:58 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Jun 2000 07:43:58 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Jun 2000 07:43:58 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de
Received: from [10.1.10.116] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Jun 2000 07:43:58 -0000
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 07:43:53 -0000
To: lojban@egroups.com
Subject: Re: Robin on cmene
Message-ID: <8hq77p+svrm@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20000609015452.00b49490@127.0.0.1>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 465
X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster
From: "=?iso-8859-1?q?Alfred_W._T=FCting?=" <Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de>

la xorxes. cusku
> It does, but this is the simplest case: all truths gives truth no
matter how you associate them.

la lojbab. cusku di'e
> pa lu'a la mixael ce la maikyl ce la maik,l ce la micael [lu'u]
> One from the individuals making up the set {la mx, la my, la m,l,
la mc}

Fine, but *logically* is this construction really necessary? (The
.o-logic seems to be quite similar to 'or' in natural language: one 
is allowed to endlessly add or-sumti.)

.aulun.