From slobin@ice.ru Thu Aug 09 15:09:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: slobin@ice.ru X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 9 Aug 2001 22:09:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 76704 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 22:08:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Aug 2001 22:08:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO party.ice.ru) (213.85.36.62) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Aug 2001 22:08:58 -0000 Received: from localhost (slobin@localhost) by party.ice.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id CAA28759 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 02:08:57 +0400 X-Authentication-Warning: party.ice.ru: slobin owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 02:08:57 +0400 (MSD) To: Subject: Re: [lojban] vliju'a In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Cyril Slobin On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Jorge Llambias wrote: > If you have doubts about lo'e (which is most reasonable of you), > then {ro djuno cu vlipa} is, I think, better. {lo djuno cu vlipa} > only says that some knower is powerful, hardly comparable to the > claim that knowledge is power. I like the very weakness of {lo djuno...}. "Some knower" sounds better to me than "every knower". I tend even to emphasize this: {lo djuno cu vlipa y su'oroi}. Of course is not the same as original maxim. -- Cyril Slobin