Subject: Re: [lojban] {lo'i} as a Q-kau solution?

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 02:08:00

la rob cusku di'e

>If you evaluate an abstraction the moment you hear it, you remove the part 
>of
>the sentence which gives it any meaning whatsoever. As I just mentioned 
>before
>(on the wrong thread, assuming this one had stopped), {mi djuno leni galtu 
>be
>la bob.} does not mean {mi djuno le pamuno centre}, because the second is 
>the
>first with the only part of the meaning that matters removed.

Of course. But {ni} is ambiguous, sometimes it refers to a number,
sometimes to an indirect question (or whatever we are calling it
this week).

>The HP49's programming language does not include the concept of layers of
>abstraction in this case. Lojban, OTOH, should if it is to be speakable at
>all, because we use layers of abstraction in ordinary communication much 
>more
>than we do in programming.

No doubt about it. But {le broda} is an instant evaluator, as you
put it (sometimes you want instant evaluation!) while {le du'u
makau broda} is not. It makes no sense mixing them up.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

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