From pycyn@aol.com Tue Oct 24 14:07:40 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_1_0); 24 Oct 2000 21:07:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 6730 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2000 21:07:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Oct 2000 21:07:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d04.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.36) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Oct 2000 21:07:34 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.32.) id a.f2.3dbdeea (3951) for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:07:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:07:31 EDT Subject: RE^n+m: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: <> I'll settle for ^raccoon^ for starters, but clearly not a gismu (and I'll temporarily disregard borrowings). Of course, you have the easy part, since I have to come up with the concept we don't yet have. I suspect, however, that some of the ones we already "have" will result in things quite ugly enough (some already have). <> Well, I don't think it has done too badly these last 45 years and probably for the next few as well, but it would be nice if more peple could carry on discussions IN Lojban, even if not at this intense level. <> I don't think I could even *appear* to be saying that, but in any case I am not. The point is, remember, about *literal* tanru, and then I am saying that, insofar as the tanru is literal the concept it presents is alrady contained in its components (not just the final one). Again, I thought this was trivial, but somehow it seems to be obscure.