Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: ka + makau (was: ce'u (was: vliju'a

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 15:06:41

la ~mark cusku di'e

>Jorge's analysis, that {mi djuno le du'u makau klama} means the same
>as {mi djuno le du'u la djan. klama} but with {la djan.} "covered up"
>seems to imply to me that it means the same as {mi djuno le du'u da
>klama},

How do you get that implication? In {mi djuno le du'u da klama}
I may not know at all who goes. Also, the covered up answer could
be {noda}. Remember that makau covers up the relevant answer, not
just any true answer.

>But where else except in "knowing" and "expressing" kinds of things do
>you have to talk about the identity of the answer to a question
>without actually having the answer?

This "identity of the answer" is very confusing to me. {makau}
stands for the answer to {ma}, that's all. {du'u ... makau} is a
du'u, not an identity, whatever that is, and {ka ... makau} is
a ka.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp