[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lo [nonexistent]

To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: lo [nonexistent]
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 10:41:02 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net (Logical Language Group)
In-Reply-To: <88293.9410101857@link-1.ts.bcc.ac.uk> from "ucleaar" at Oct 10, 94 07:57:29 pm

la .and. cusku di'e

> I don't think lohe makes claims about the world;

I agree.

> it makes claims for
> default properties of categories in our minds. So it works.

On your view, then, the difference between "le'e" and "lo'e" is that
the former refers to the speaker's idiosyncratic categories or properties
thereof, whereas the latter refers to consensus categories or properties?

-- 
John Cowan		sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.

References:
- Re: lo [nonexistent]
  - From: ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>

Prev by Date: Re: Types of quantification
Next by Date: Re: Mystery message
Prev by thread: Re: lo [nonexistent]
Next by thread: Re: lo [nonexistent]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread