From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sat Aug 04 21:01:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 5 Aug 2001 04:01:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 15029 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 04:01:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Aug 2001 04:01:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.228) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Aug 2001 04:01:02 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:01:02 -0700 Received: from 200.69.11.214 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 05 Aug 2001 04:01:02 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.69.11.214] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: ka + makau (was: ce'u (was: vliju'a Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 04:01:02 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 04:01:02.0531 (UTC) FILETIME=[3E2ED930:01C11D63] From: "Jorge Llambias" la adam cusku di'e > 1) la meris kucli le du'u makau klama le zarci > 2) la meris kucli le du'u la djan klama le zarci > >It seems me that in 1), Mary is wondering about the identity of who >goes, whereas in 2), Mary is wondering about the fact that John goes. >The makau could be replaced by la djan in 1), and it would change the >meaning. Or maybe that's not what 1) means, but if it isn't, how do >you say it? I agree about 1), I'm not sure how you are interpreting 2). {kucli} requires that x1 doesn't know the truth value of x2, so if there is no explicit kau, 2) could mean {la meris kucli le du'u xukau la djan klama le zarci} or even something like {la meris kucli le du'u la djan klama le zarci makau makau makau}. In any case, there is a fact that you're making reference to, and the claim is that that fact is in relationship kucli with Mary. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp