From araizen@newmail.net Thu May 31 14:41:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 31 May 2001 21:41:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 39140 invoked from network); 31 May 2001 21:34:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 May 2001 21:34:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ei.egroups.com) (64.211.240.237) by mta3 with SMTP; 31 May 2001 21:34:52 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: araizen@newmail.net Received: from [10.1.10.113] by ei.egroups.com with NNFMP; 31 May 2001 21:16:46 -0000 Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 21:16:43 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: RE:[lojban] Request for grammar clarifications Message-ID: <9f6cbr+418v@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 642 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 12.81.164.206 From: "Adam Raizen" la pycyn cusku di'e > > ro cevni du la .alax." = "Every god is identical with Allah". > > > > But does this really capture the sense of "la ilahi il'allah" (which I > > assume > > it is a translation of)? > > > > Well, the formula looks to be negative ("la"), and the usual trat is "There > is no God but Allah" so it might literally be {no da poi na du la .allax. cu > cevni}, which, unfortunately, allows for atheism, so it is not right either > -- for so does the cowan's version. As I was saying about quantifiers, ... There's also the logically abominable :-) version: "no da e la alex ji'anai cevni". mu'o mi'e adam