From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Dec 03 09:19:08 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 17:19:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 94947 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 17:19:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 17:19:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.240) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 18:20:12 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 09:19:06 -0800 Received: from 200.42.118.217 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 03 Dec 2000 17:19:06 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.118.217] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] common words Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 17:19:06 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2000 17:19:06.0789 (UTC) FILETIME=[24380550:01C05D4D] From: "Jorge Llambias" la ivAn cusku di'e >{to'e} means scalar opposite, which is not the same thing as >reversal of the effect of an action, right? It isn't? If an action has an effect N, doing more of the action results in more N, and doing less of the action results in a smaller increase of N, but still an increase, and doing nothing results in no change in N, then why isn't the action that results in a decrease of N not the scalar opposite? (For example, putting things in a box and removing things from the box.) >So {tolmifra} >doesn't automatically mean `decode'; That's because {mifra} doesn't mean "to code" either. co'o mi'e xorxes _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com