Received: from mail-ey0-f189.google.com ([209.85.215.189]:41058) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SzFHn-0006Qn-VM; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 16:03:37 -0700 Received: by eaan13 with SMTP id n13sf491626eaa.16 for ; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 16:03:24 -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:date :message-id:subject:from: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=dWBQTweaY7S5Rbcxf/rNnbXDh1G8H7x1c9RhkghvK9Y=; b=3EGVa1h3hBMxpiZJiu8Go+fk4P3qXC4509ZdAIptwoLKnufjWJsXnok5rmpjgb+R+E pPLFD6UvLmIB9TovTgq7/2elbj9EKToffIfmYOVYFzF+6xWw5jQfA0knU1g9IuiptcQ7 VSth85YMHmmWUspxHLxro9AGs8k+ppivJy/aI= Received: by 10.204.147.89 with SMTP id k25mr834684bkv.30.1344466400115; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:53:20 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.4.74 with SMTP id 10ls1964008bkq.0.gmail; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.129.81 with SMTP id n17mr3884488bks.3.1344466398933; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.129.81 with SMTP id n17mr3884487bks.3.1344466398908; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f52.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f52.google.com [209.85.215.52]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k7si6836217bks.2.2012.08.08.15.53.18 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.52; Received: by mail-lpp01m010-f52.google.com with SMTP id e4so543575lag.25 for ; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:53:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.114.3 with SMTP id jc3mr1796309lab.11.1344466398620; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.152.136.73 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 15:53:18 -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> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:53:18 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: sedu'u and ko From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@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=f46d04088c7f1a2cb404c6c8fab3 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / --f46d04088c7f1a2cb404c6c8fab3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:20 AM, 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. Because NU eat bridi for breakfast. For example, {nu mi citka} is "x1 is state/process/achievement/activity of [I eat]." > 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. It refers to the NU by itself, but the grammar of NU require that a bridi is between NU...[kei]. The grammar has nothing to do with the definition. > How am I wrong? Does any abstractor form an > abstraction all by itself? No. > If so, what {lo se du'u kei} would mean? > Does it mean {lo se du'u co'e kei}? No, but I for one think it'd be nice if it did. > Or is it illegal? > Yes. > 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. > > -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) -- 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. --f46d04088c7f1a2cb404c6c8fab3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:20 AM, Efrain Caro <b= etsemes@gmail.com> wrote:
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.

Because NU eat bridi for breakfast.
For example, {nu mi citka} is "x1 is state/process/achiev= ement/activity of [I eat]."
=A0
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.

It refers to the NU by itself, b= ut the grammar of NU require that a bridi is between NU...[kei]. The gramma= r has nothing to do with the definition.
=A0
How am I wrong? Does any abstractor form an
abstraction all by itself?

No.
=A0
If so, what {lo se du'u kei} would mean?
Does it mean {lo se du'u co'e kei}?

No, but I = for one think it'd be nice if it did.
=A0
Or is it illegal?

Yes.
=A0
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.




--
mu'o mi= 'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.l= uk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. = :D )

--
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.
--f46d04088c7f1a2cb404c6c8fab3--