From reiter@netspace.net.au Sat May 06 03:26:06 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9860 invoked from network); 6 May 2000 10:26:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 May 2000 10:26:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO snufflelufagas.bofh.asn.au) (139.130.48.34) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 May 2000 10:26:04 -0000 Received: from river.UUCP (uucp@localhost) by snufflelufagas.bofh.asn.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with UUCP id UAA15251; Sat, 6 May 2000 20:23:59 +1000 Received: by forest.bofh.asn.au via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.102) for jjllambias@hotmail.com; Sat, 6 May 2000 16:40:51 +1000 (EST) To: "Jorge Llambias" Cc: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] So, wait til you feel a cold no-nose References: <20000504133953.52290.qmail@hotmail.com> Date: 06 May 2000 16:40:50 +1000 In-Reply-To: "Jorge Llambias"'s message of "Thu, 04 May 2000 06:39:53 PDT" Message-ID: Lines: 17 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Peter Moulder la xorxes. no'u cusku di'e > >The places of {jmina} after the agent place look about right. It's easy to > >add an agent in lojban; how do you drop one? > > {zi'o} is used to drop a place, but I avoid it as much as > I can, it doesn't feel right. Isn't {sumji} the agentless > {jmina}? My tendency would be to leave sumji as mathematical as possible, i.e. as close as possible to existing concepts of addition in mathematics, so I'd say there's an even stronger case for saying that sumji should be commutative than the corresponding case for jmina. The word {tanru} is probably more suitable. The definition is more generic than what we usually think of as tanru: tanru [ tau ] phrase compound x1 is a binary metaphor formed with x2 modifying x3, giving meaning x4 in language x5
(x2 and x3 are both text or both si'o concept) So I think it is appropriate for general grammatical modification, including subject/predicate in English (see x5). co'o mi'e pijem.