From adam@pubcrawler.org Mon Mar 08 04:04:43 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 08 Mar 2004 07:14:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from postal.seas.wustl.edu ([128.252.145.2]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B0JUv-0004kH-KX for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2004 04:04:42 -0800 Received: from clarion.cec.wustl.edu (clarion.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.3]) by postal.seas.wustl.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i28C4Fb20035 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 06:04:15 -0600 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by clarion.cec.wustl.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i28C4TFr018814 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 06:04:29 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: clarion.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 06:04:28 -0600 (CST) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Feedback on phrases In-Reply-To: <20040308004413.K8729@fresco.Math.McGill.CA> Message-ID: References: <100e21fcf79.fcf79100e21@imap.epfl.ch> <20040308004413.K8729@fresco.Math.McGill.CA> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Status: No, -5.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Report: -5.8/5.0 ---- Start SpamAssassin results -5.80 points, 5 required; * -0.0 -- Has a valid-looking References header * 0.0 -- Message-Id indicates a non-spam MUA (Pine) * -0.4 -- Has a In-Reply-To header * -0.4 -- Has a X-Authentication-Warning header * -0.5 -- BODY: Contains what looks like an email attribution * 0.1 -- BODY: Odd Letter Triples with LX * 0.0 -- BODY: {2}Letter - garbage - {1}Letter * 0.6 -- BODY: {2}Letter - punctuation - {1}Letter * 0.0 -- BODY: {4}Letter - garbage - {1}Letter * 0.6 -- BODY: {4}Letter - punctuation - {1}Letter * -5.4 -- BODY: Bayesian classifier says spam probability is 1 to 10% [score: 0.0190] * -0.4 -- BODY: Contains what looks like a quoted email text * 0.0 -- Reply with quoted text ---- End of SpamAssassin results X-archive-position: 584 X-Approved-By: jkominek@miranda.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: adam@pubcrawler.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Andrew Archibald wrote: > On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 10:22:00AM +0100, GREGORY DYKE wrote: > > > le mi palku cu barda (my pants are big) > .ija le mi solri blaci cu manku > .i ko se zgike .o'u.u'e > > > barda is the selbri > > le mi palku is a sumti > > Ah. Maybe it would be clearer to say that every sentence needs a > selbri at the top level? If you really want to get away without the other selbri, you can make palku the main selbri, but you have to drop the le, and so fiddle it around a little vi ma palku sera'a mi vi ma zo'e pe mi palku or something like that. (I think "vi ma pi'o mi palku" would be sort of nice). > > > I can see the justification for it ({le} and {lo} should never > > > implicitly make an assertion) but it does seem awkward. > > > > no! lo does make an assertion: > > > > lo kanba cu citka = > > da poi kanba zo'u da citka > > > > there exists a goat such that this goat eats. > > Well, all {lo} asserts is ``there exists a goat''. Not that this is > trivial: {lo vofli xarju cu ma} is a question making a rather dubious > statement. Can it be answered with Hofstadter's "unask that > question!"? Is {na} sufficient? "na'i" does just that. -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ .a'o le ko selmri go selxru gi festrspama -- May only your spam bounce