From pycyn@aol.com Sat Jun 24 17:43:11 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22726 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 00:43:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 25 Jun 2000 00:43:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r10.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.10) by mta2 with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 00:43:08 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.10.) id a.7d.6b0326d (9243) for ; Sat, 24 Jun 2000 20:43:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <7d.6b0326d.2686af96@aol.com> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 20:43:02 EDT Subject: RECORD: cevni 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 cevni cev cei god 'divinity' x1 is a/the god/deity of people(s)/religion x2 with dominion over x3 [sphere]; x1 is divine ac 197 [also divinity; x2 religion refers to the religious community as a mass]; (cf. censa, krici, lijda, malsi) So, one ought not make any assumptions about the referent(s) of {le/lo cevni} other than that the speakers is talking about thing(s) s/he thinks existent -- in the context under discussion. Note, the fact that the speaker assumes this does not make said speaker right. Conversely, users should be clear about what religious (etc.) context they are employing and be as precise as possible about the context. So, don't point a {cevni} at someone and assume that they will take the referent to be yours (this is good general advice for predicates, but {cevni} seems to get a hotter reaction than others).