From xod@sixgirls.org Tue Feb 06 11:53:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@erika.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 19:52:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 43745 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 19:52:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 19:52:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO erika.sixgirls.org.) (209.208.150.50) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 19:52:36 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by erika.sixgirls.org. (8.11.2/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f16JqZN12490 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:52:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:52:33 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:su'u In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, And Rosta wrote: > Thanks. I understand (maybe). I agree with pc, then, that there's a > problem (and I also think that it is the "(me) la X" form (and the notion of > reference) that is metaphysically faulty). Metaphysically faulty? It is metaphysically faulty to interpret "me la foo." "as x1 is refered to as foo"? ----- We do not like And if a cat those Rs and Ds, needed a hat? Who can't resist Free enterprise more subsidies. is there for that!