Received: from mail-qc0-f185.google.com ([209.85.216.185]:55408)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban-beginners+bncBCV3TMWBWMCRBU52X6HQKGQEMD6RGNY@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1V1zZb-0007uV-QX; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:57:58 -0700
Received: by mail-qc0-f185.google.com with SMTP id e1sf166267qcx.12
        for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:57:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-beenthere:to:subject:mime-version:date:from:in-reply-to
         :references:message-id:x-sender:user-agent: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
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=Ra58kct9GnJz/XOOAUc+l5rI2JjvwZuUNfWaPkrgBoc=;
        b=j8qg+YhPrWy+UeiI4Ir6h0wOVUeaq0s2H2wqFULy3diAMMp8iSJksUhlZEn4DC12++
         FBy4dzCZLQ1+y7aeDa6NeZrv6MyS1KjnLcwTNxqgEFgII26MnxjQxcthghBXsBxY6m3l
         3orc4DejSdxN0yXFXTO51JlCdcVA7ElkTO+SzB7Reqqj85RZlRMOysJqm2izLHpCj/7I
         +aoePYnarfr0fwMyHA82ESe9djOORwGwwU99o/4b23+w7S83X+odsz3lv9CveZmBAPb0
         DhNVZ3mkj+Eb4fnHCXGgURR6n/arhJTUuFeIBoHIJtRZxYPGBJfEnr6L+DkNigpK5lJ3
         Lvsw==
X-Received: by 10.50.77.78 with SMTP id q14mr275105igw.2.1374674260148;
        Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:57:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.50.78.193 with SMTP id d1ls2614713igx.28.canary; Wed, 24 Jul
 2013 06:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.50.12.99 with SMTP id x3mr2752811igb.3.1374674258962;
        Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from www3.webmail.pair.com (www3.webmail.pair.com. [66.39.3.34])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id r4si450604ign.3.2013.07.24.06.57.38
        for <lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>;
        Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 66.39.3.34 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of m3o@plasmatix.com) client-ip=66.39.3.34;
Received: (qmail 56239 invoked by uid 65534); 24 Jul 2013 13:57:38 -0000
To: <lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] {goi}, {xu}, {pei}
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:57:37 +0200
From: selpa'i <m3o@plasmatix.com>
In-Reply-To: <cffd0c09-5680-49cf-8163-2dbfac7d7854@googlegroups.com>
References: <cffd0c09-5680-49cf-8163-2dbfac7d7854@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <1a70391c913871b4e0665c348f4abdf2@plasmatix.com>
X-Sender: m3o@plasmatix.com
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.8.1
X-Original-Sender: m3o@plasmatix.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=neutral
 (google.com: 66.39.3.34 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record
 for domain of m3o@plasmatix.com) smtp.mail=m3o@plasmatix.com
Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban-beginners.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 300742228892
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/post>, <mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:lojban-beginners+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners>
Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe>, <mailto:lojban-beginners+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+300742228892+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 1
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  On 24.07.2013 12:25, iesk wrote: > I just said on the main
    list (or intended to say, typos aside): > > {.i mi na tavla fi la remoi nunji'e
    goi xu la'o gy. Second Life .gy} > > The {xu} is wrong there, right? [...]
    
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.1 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED  RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to DNSWL
                             was blocked.  See
                             http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                              for more information.
                             [209.85.216.185 listed in list.dnswl.org]
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
                             See
                             http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                              for more information.
                             [URIs: googlegroups.com]
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
  0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID         DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid

On 24.07.2013 12:25, iesk wrote:
> I just said on the main list (or intended to say, typos aside):
>
> {.i mi na tavla fi la remoi nunji'e goi xu la'o gy. Second Life .gy}
>
> The {xu} is wrong there, right?

I would say that a sentence containing {xu} is a question, and you=20
intended the main clause to be an assertion, so {xu} isn't what you=20
want.

> I mean, {goi} is =85 performative? =85 so
> I should not ask about truth values (which is what {xu} is for?) but
> about =85 appropriateness?

Yes, {goi} is performative. I probably wouldn't use {goi} in this=20
sentence at all. I would use {no'u} or {noi}, or {to ... toi}.

> Would {pei} have been better?

It clashes a little bit with the {goi}; "hereby the same as X, how do=20
you feel about that?". It might be better than {xu}, although it's not=20
entirely clear if {pei} causes irrealis or not. I could see it going=20
either way.

You could say:

      (1) la re moi nunji'e (to xu du la'o gy. Second Life .gy toi)

or if you want to use your {pei} idea, provided that it doesn't affect=20
the mood:

      (2) la re moi nunji'e ku no'u pei la'o gy. Second Life .gy

(note that you forgot a {ku})

I would most likely go with (1), personally. The {pei} feels a bit=20
weird to me.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
Lojban Beginners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.