From rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Thu Feb 22 09:46:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rlpowell@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 22 Feb 2001 17:46:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 41477 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2001 17:45:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Feb 2001 17:45:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca) (129.97.134.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Feb 2001 18:46:45 -0000 Received: (from rlpowell@localhost) by calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) id MAA22854; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:51:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:51:37 -0500 To: John Cowan Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] set mechanics Message-ID: <20010222125136.H5703@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Mail-Followup-To: John Cowan , lojban@yahoogroups.com References: <20010221222111.D5703@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <3A953C62.6070704@reutershealth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3A953C62.6070704@reutershealth.com>; from jcowan@reutershealth.com on Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:20:50AM -0500 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:20:50AM -0500, John Cowan wrote: > Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > > Does anyone interpret: > > > > mi ce do ku'a na'e bo do > > > > as resulting in anything other than the set with the single element > > 'mi'? > > Strictly, "na'ebo do" means "something other than you", and what it > refers to is context-sensitive. In this context, it would be > legitimate to read it as "the set complement of {you}", but that > is not the only conceivable reading. The set consisting of > John and someone other than Mary need not be the union of {John} > and ~{Mary}. Understood. Would to'e be clearer? > > mi ce do goi ko'a > > > > binds ko'a to do. Does anyone have an elegant way to bind ko'a to the > > two element set mi ce do? > > This is what "vu'o" is for -- binding a relative clause/phrase to a > compound sumti. Ah. Had completely forgotten about that. Thanks. Where is it in the book? -Robin -- http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. Information wants to be free. Too bad most of it is crap. --RLP