From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Aug 22 12:04:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 22 Aug 2001 19:04:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 72684 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 18:58:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Aug 2001 18:58:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.132) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Aug 2001 18:58:09 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:58:09 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:58:08 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: status of ka (was Re: [lojban] x3 of du'u Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:58:08 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2001 18:58:09.0055 (UTC) FILETIME=[62505AF0:01C12B3C] From: "Jorge Llambias" la and cusku di'e >The convention would be: > >1. inside ka: fill every logically-present but syntactically absent place >with >ce'u I don't like this at all. What is a "logically-present" place? I want {le ka ce'u dunda} to be the property of being a giver, and {le ka dunda ce'u} the property of being a gift. >poi'i [[ [NU] ] x1 is such that poi'i abstraction is true; x1 binds ke'a >within the abstraction. Would it be equivalent to {du da poi}? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp