Re: A Problem with Abstractions

["John E. Clifford" <Pycyn@AOL.COM>]

I'm finally getting around to reading some of these threads (and finding them
thoroughly
tangled, I must say, though this one is not bad aside from my never getting
some
messages on it).
Yes, I did read Horn and send a precis (which I can no longer find) on to
Lojbab and
John.  But that precis (as far as I can recall)  did not affect that
clause-length _na_,
arguments about which go back at least to the early days of the old Loglan
 journal, with
a "final" decision having been made several times, depending on which
desiderata were
at the fore at the moment.  In spite of its apparent complexity, the present
form (which
was the original one) works the best in the long run.  As for the English
version of this
usage, Day One of any Logic section on the Aristotelian syllogism involves
pounding in
the rule that "All S is not P" is ambiguous between E and O, to be sorted out
in context
and usually deciding for O (this sermonette comes right after the one about
"only" -- but
please don't revive *that* thread -- and "none but").
>|83 pc