From cowan@ccil.org Mon Jul 16 18:38:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: cowan@mercury.ccil.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 17 Jul 2001 01:38:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 38132 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 01:38:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Jul 2001 01:38:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mercury.ccil.org) (192.190.237.100) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Jul 2001 01:38:50 -0000 Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 15MJBY-0006Sm-00; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:58:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [lojban] questions about DOI & cmene In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010716193100.00c23b20@127.0.0.1> from "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" at "Jul 16, 2001 07:36:51 pm" To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:58:00 -0400 (EDT) Cc: jimc@math.ucla.edu X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) scripsit: > Umm, asking me veridical or non-v. doesn't to me differentiate between la > and le, since both are non-v. in that neither la xunre nor le xunre have to > actually be red. It differentiates between la/le and lo. True. > Saying that there was no question of its meaning something doesn't tell me > whether it means it or doesn't mean it (I can read it either way), so which > are you concluding? I conclude that "doi cribe" = "doi la cribe" was never considered, because that is not what Carter vocatives are for: they are all about identifying "do" based on some characteristic such as "girl in the red dress". The question was whether that description had to be veridical; you said it didn't. I have copied jimc. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore --Douglas Hofstadter