From pycyn@aol.com Mon May 28 17:56:23 2001
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 29 May 2001 00:56:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 67212 invoked from network); 29 May 2001 00:56:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 29 May 2001 00:56:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m08.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.163) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 May 2001 00:56:22 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id r.7e.15a0669c (25100) for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Mon, 28 May 2001 20:56:19 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <7e.15a0669c.28444db3@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:56:19 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] RE: Grammar Clarifications
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_7e.15a0669c.28444db3_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519
From: pycyn@aol.com

--part1_7e.15a0669c.28444db3_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 5/28/2001 12:52:55 PM Central Daylight Time, 
xod@sixgirls.org writes:



> <> That aside
> > (incompetence, surely -- why will people take up a logical language and 
> not
> > learn logic?), just why has identity, of all the logical primitives, 
> fallen
> > into disfavor?
> 
> 
> 
> Anti-malglico backlash; discomfort with the fact that it can't be tossed
> around like "is".>
> 


But, as noted, it CAN be tossed around like the English word "is." It is 
just that doing so is considered 1) very bad style 2) (as in logic classes) 
evidence that you don't really understand what you are doing/saying 3) likely 
to get you into deep doo-doo in complicated cases. All of which are true. 
But none of these are reasons to dump {du}, just reasons to learn to use it 
(and the rest of the apparatus) correctly. Without {du} we can't do a large 
nuumber of things that any language, but especially a logical langauge, needs 
to do.

--part1_7e.15a0669c.28444db3_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 5/28/2001 12:52:55 PM Central Daylight Time, 
<BR>xod@sixgirls.org writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&lt;&gt; That aside
<BR>&gt; (incompetence, surely -- why will people take up a logical language and 
<BR>not
<BR>&gt; learn logic?), just why has identity, of all the logical primitives, 
<BR>fallen
<BR>&gt; into disfavor?
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Anti-malglico backlash; discomfort with the fact that it can't be tossed
<BR>around like "is".&gt;
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>But, as noted, it CAN be tossed around like the English word "is." &nbsp;It is 
<BR>just that doing so is considered 1) very bad style 2) (as in logic classes) 
<BR>evidence that you don't really understand what you are doing/saying 3) likely 
<BR>to get you into deep doo-doo in complicated cases. &nbsp;All of which are true. &nbsp;
<BR>But none of these are reasons to dump {du}, just reasons to learn to use it 
<BR>(and the rest of the apparatus) correctly. &nbsp;Without {du} we can't do a large 
<BR>nuumber of things that any language, but especially a logical langauge, needs 
<BR>to do.</FONT></HTML>

--part1_7e.15a0669c.28444db3_boundary--

