On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 00:04, Brett Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You wouldn't use "lo" in a situation where the referent is not literally and
> exactly the sort of thing that goes in the brivla place you're using as a
> description. If you were talking about a plastic apple, you could call it
> "le plise" or you could call it "lo slasi" (a plastic thing), but you
> wouldn't say "lo plise" because that would imply falsely that the thing you
> are referring to is actually an apple.
Alas, I'm not sure this is true. (If it were, it would be a great
explanation.) But one can correctly say {lo slasi plise} to refer to a
plastic apple. And in a paragraph, you could introduce the apple with
{lo slasi plise} and refer to it subsequently with the shorter {lo
plise}.
Chris Capel
--
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)
