Received: from mail-vb0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]:61271) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SzBGQ-0004Q5-AJ; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:54 -0700 Received: by vbzb23 with SMTP id b23sf473147vbz.16 for ; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=E2ojnSrtkXCHVR4aEXjOQCeXWmXzv65Cdektfh9nTPc=; b=cjznmeKDvuhVM3G+EJWNbyq776rqqiNS6+NcBVEmPW3ImNdfSFuiJdGyHNp2MHcN94 ordkdE1gBw3mP/Ct12+omUbWs0QjjN6/3qgjDR8VZk0k31em0mXYjNs72M4m+lLC5GFZ 73yMPFnvBUtZhGuLTt2TKNPitamx2WkqQf1fM= Received: by 10.52.97.102 with SMTP id dz6mr2296949vdb.2.1344451538234; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:38 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.220.148.143 with SMTP id p15ls1589916vcv.9.gmail; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.33.169 with SMTP id s9mr5095843vdi.5.1344451537578; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.33.169 with SMTP id s9mr5095841vdi.5.1344451537561; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vb0-f51.google.com (mail-vb0-f51.google.com [209.85.212.51]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y4si3585243vds.2.2012.08.08.11.45.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nictytan@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.51; Received: by mail-vb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id fn1so1135532vbb.24 for ; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.211.100 with SMTP id nb4mr12730977vec.25.1344451537458; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 11:45:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.24.193 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 11:45:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201208062302.06087.phma@phma.optus.nu> <201208070002.10472.phma@phma.optus.nu> <790b043f-085d-479d-98ab-5dbe51bf04b6@j28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <5f3c1611-8497-46d7-bc2c-34cfead5d0c5@j11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> <50216ED9.5050608@plasmatix.com> From: Jacob Errington Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 14:45:16 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: sedu'u and ko To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: nictytan@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of nictytan@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nictytan@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 300742228892 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6bf9e4ed5fa04c6c5846a X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / --047d7bd6bf9e4ed5fa04c6c5846a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 8 August 2012 07:20, Efrain Caro wrote: > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > > Really? Then why do they ALL have place tags in their definition? > > > > du'u abstractor: predication/bridi abstractor; x1 is predication [bridi] > > expressed in sentence x2. > > Jonathan, you are obviously a more knowledgeable person on matters of > Lojban than myself; so pardon me whether I'm asking a stupid question. > > I want to ask why those definitions contain *[bridi]* in their > definitions. By themselves, I assume they don't. I must assume thus > that the definition refers to a complete abstraction and not the > abstractor by itself. How am I wrong? Does any abstractor form an > abstraction all by itself? If so, what {lo se du'u kei} would mean? > Does it mean {lo se du'u co'e kei}? Or is it illegal? > > Please, explain. > > mu'o mi'e betsemes > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. > > NU produces a selbri and a selbri contains by definition a place structure. However, NU *by themselves* don't have a place structure. The selbri that they produce does. The distinction is subtle, but it does exist. Therefore, SE do not apply to NU proper. They apply to selbri (and connectives and tags). NU cannot be empty: the parse *will* fail. That is to say that {lo du'u kei} is not grammatical. mu'o mi'e la tsani -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. --047d7bd6bf9e4ed5fa04c6c5846a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 8 August 2012 07:20, Efrain Caro <betsemes@gmail.com> wr= ote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> Really? Then why do they ALL have place tags in their definition?
>
> du'u abstractor: predication/bridi abstractor; x1 is predication [= bridi]
> expressed in sentence x2.

Jonathan, you are obviously a more knowledgeable person on matters of=
Lojban than myself; so pardon me whether I'm asking a stupid question.<= br>
I want to ask why those definitions contain *[bridi]* in their
definitions. By themselves, I assume they don't. I must assume thus
that the definition refers to a complete abstraction and not the
abstractor by itself. How am I wrong? Does any abstractor form an
abstraction all by itself? If so, what {lo se du'u kei} would mean?
Does it mean {lo se du'u co'e kei}? Or is it illegal?

Please, explain.

mu'o mi'e betsemes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegr= oups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.


NU produces a selbri and a selbri c= ontains by definition a place structure. However, NU *by themselves* don= 9;t have a place structure. The selbri that they produce does. The distinct= ion is subtle, but it does exist. Therefore, SE do not apply to NU proper. = They apply to selbri (and connectives and tags).

NU cannot be empty: the parse *will* fail. That is to s= ay that {lo du'u kei} is not grammatical.


=
mu'o mi'e la tsani

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
--047d7bd6bf9e4ed5fa04c6c5846a--