From lojbab@lojban.org Tue Jun 12 04:51:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 12 Jun 2001 11:51:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 7704 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2001 11:51:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jun 2001 11:51:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-4.cais.net) (205.252.14.74) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Jun 2001 11:51:25 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (35.dynamic.cais.com [207.226.56.35]) by stmpy-4.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5CBpOs45202 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 07:51:24 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010612075432.00db4c30@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 07:56:33 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] RE: zi'o and modals In-Reply-To: <3B257C43.AE1EB574@flash.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 09:19 PM 06/11/2001 -0500, Richard Todd wrote: >Except, now it bothers me even more that {ti botpi fo zi'o} doesn't >exclude the set of all bottles that *do* have caps. The way it is, how >would you say, unambiguously, that "this is a botpi, except without a >cap"? I don't see why "botpi fo noda" doesn't work. It actually DOES have a cap, potentially (as do most botpi), but there is no cap on it. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org