Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:su'u

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:07:23 EST

In a message dated 2/13/2001 12:08:53 PM Central Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> I believe that pc was envisaging a solution along the lines of:
> 
> 8 *John believes le du'u da poi le ka la ortcut kei ckaji ke'a cu spy
> 
> 9 *da poi le ka la ortcut kei ckaji ke'a zo'u John believes le du'u da spy
> 
> the idea being that "la ortcut" in *"ka la ortcut kei" cannot be replaced
> by anything coreferential with "la ortcut".
> 
> There may be many errors and misunderstandings here, so I invite
> corrections from pc and John (and whoever else).
> 

Aside from some worries about using names for these people at all, I think -- 
barring problems I have not yet thought of (i.e., that no one has yet 
mentioned) that that is it. The fact that a coreferential can't be 
substituted for a name in a ka phrase seems to catch the crucial piece. But I 
do want to insist that being called Orcutt doesn't matter either (I think 
this tends toward view I). 
Thanks. (sorry about getting caught up in the fun stuff peripheral to the 
point at issue. If it soothes xod's monocosmia any, I should note tht for 
all the techno-logical apparatus I've been talking about, very little 
concrete results have emerged in a century. The best summary I can come up 
with is "You get back about what you put in" in ways obvious by now from the 
descriptions of how these worlds are set up.)