From richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com Wed May 02 17:12:11 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 3 May 2001 00:12:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 7806 invoked from network); 2 May 2001 21:46:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 May 2001 21:46:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO s1.uklinux.net) (212.1.130.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 May 2001 21:46:01 -0000 Received: from rrbcurnow.freeuk.com (root@ppp-1-226.cvx1.telinco.net [212.1.136.226]) by s1.uklinux.net (8.11.2/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f42Ljv102642 for ; Wed, 2 May 2001 22:45:57 +0100 Envelope-To: Received: from richard by rrbcurnow.freeuk.com with local (Exim 2.02 #2) id 14uigb-00006f-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 1 May 2001 23:32:01 +0100 Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 23:32:01 +0100 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Predicate logic and childhood. Message-ID: <20010501233201.C110@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com References: <20010430155318.B504@twcny.rr.com> <20010430114521.C20818@digitalkingdom.org> <20010430155318.B504@twcny.rr.com> <20010430140028.A27753@digitalkingdom.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20010430171850.00b16cd0@127.0.0.1> <20010430144802.B27753@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i-nntp In-Reply-To: <20010430144802.B27753@digitalkingdom.org>; from rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 02:48:02PM -0700 From: Richard Curnow On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 02:48:02PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > Once again, either your wrong or jbofi'e has a bug: > > go ko viska gi cusku > (0[go {ko viska} gi cusku])0 > > And I see no indication of such scoping in the grammar, but that proves > very little. Note that ko go viska gi cusku is also valid, and in this case the ko _will_ be viska1 and cusku1 if that's what you wanted. In your example, ko is only viska1 and cusku is an observative with an implied X1. FWIW, ko gu'o viska gi cusku is also valid and probably means about the same as my go/gi version. -- Richard P. Curnow, Weston-super-Mare, UK http://www.rrbcurnow.freeuk.com/ email:richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com email:rpc@myself.com