From jcowan@reutershealth.com Mon Jul 10 10:51:21 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6986 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2000 17:51:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 10 Jul 2000 17:51:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.reutershealth.com) (204.243.9.36) by mta1 with SMTP; 10 Jul 2000 17:51:11 -0000 Received: from reutershealth.com (IDENT:cowan@skunk.reutershealth.com [204.243.9.153]) by mail.reutershealth.com (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA26969; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:50:02 -0400 (EDT) Sender: cowan@mail.reutershealth.com Message-ID: <396A0C8F.2D0FEED5@reutershealth.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:49:03 -0400 Organization: Reuters Health Information X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: And Rosta , "lojban@onelist.com" Subject: Re: [lojban] A defense of dead horse beating References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: John Cowan And Rosta wrote: > Hold on, though. I can't think what use {da voi broda} would > be, but surely it's not the same as {su'o le broda}, because > the latter entails that there is a referent for {le broda}. I think they are the same, and both entail a referent. Using "da" = "there exists at-least-one" surely means that it has a referent. > And isn't {ro lo broda} merely the same as {lo broda}? No, lo broda is su'o lo broda. OTOH, le broda is ro le broda. > I still don't see a gadri-based way of getting (the admittedly > useless) {da voi broda}, though, which, after all, is not a bad > thing. Hmm. What do you think "da voi broda" means, that would make it useless? -- Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)