From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Jun 13 17:20:59 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20196 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2000 00:20:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Jun 2000 00:20:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.101) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Jun 2000 00:20:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 5797 invoked by uid 0); 14 Jun 2000 00:20:58 -0000 Message-ID: <20000614002058.5796.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.32.23.179 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:20:58 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.32.23.179] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: lujvo Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:20:58 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la xod cusku di'e >If a Christian really believes there is only one True God, it behooves >them to use "lo" to indicate their absolute belief. That's not really how {lo} works. Its veridicality is less important than its indefiniteness. I think someone using {lo cevni} = "some god", would get across a different meaning, much less absolutist. Even {lo pa cevni} doesn't quite do it. In English a Christian can say and believe to be true something like "at least one god created the universe", but it is unlikely that they would choose to put it that way. Just the same effect is obtained with {lo}. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com