From pycyn@aol.com Thu Oct 19 14:40:27 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_1_0); 19 Oct 2000 21:40:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 31416 invoked from network); 19 Oct 2000 21:37:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Oct 2000 21:37:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r04.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.4) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Oct 2000 21:37:00 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.31.) id a.b8.cb1111d (3926) for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:36:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:36:48 EDT Subject: RE:literalism To: lojban@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 41 From: pycyn@aol.com xod: <> It isn't even unambiguity (any way to get there is an unambiguous as another, once you get there), but a predetermined notion of what means are appropriate for forming compounds -- and tanru (against xod's later remark that thse somehow are to be dealt with differently).