From adam@pubcrawler.org Wed Oct 13 10:48:44 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:48:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.252.1.53] (helo=mite.int.cec.wustl.edu) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1CHnEy-0002cd-BD for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:48:44 -0700 Received: from mite.int.cec.wustl.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mite.int.cec.wustl.edu (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9DGS2Zh001072; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:28:02 -0500 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by mite.int.cec.wustl.edu (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id i9DGS2ov001069; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:28:02 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: mite.int.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:28:01 -0500 (CDT) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: cmavo can be selbri? In-Reply-To: <87hdozatdi.fsf@pacbell.net> Message-ID: References: <87r7ocvn9y.fsf@pacbell.net> <200410061402.i96E2VMY019310@mole.e-mol.com> <87hdozatdi.fsf@pacbell.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-archive-position: 816 X-Approved-By: adam@pubcrawler.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 Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Starling wrote: > "Adam D. Lopresto" writes: > >> Well, if you really wanted to say "xu is a member of the set of cmavo" that >> would be {zo xu cmima lo'i cmavo}, but I think what you really want to say is >> "xu is a cmavo" which is very simply {zo xu cmavo}. > > Actually my question had to do with whether all cmavo could be used as > the selbri in a bridi. 'xu' cannot, while 'du' can it seems. I > suppose it's just arbitrary, or obvious, and perhaps 'xu' could > describe a selbri about x1 x2 x3 being uncertain in relation to each > other. But I did want to make sure there wasn't some rule I haven't > found yet that states all cmavo can be used as selbri, even ones that > don't fit any undestandable thought pattern. Yeah, basically different cmavo (or technically different selma'o, the classes of cmavo) are used differently. 'xu' belongs to the selma'o UI, which can appear pretty much anywhere, but don't change the grammar of the bridi they're in (though they may change the meaning). 'du' is in GOhA, which is the ones that act as selbri (and which Robin listed earlier). Others do different things. There's a lot to learn, but it starts to come pretty easily after a while. > > You are right though. ;) I said "xu zo'e cmavo la xu" when the sumti > should have been "zo xu" and placed in x1 not x2 of cmavo. Thus "zo > xu cmavo" makes good sense. And to go full circle, this might make > sense as well to equate 'xu' as a cmavo-thing. > > zo xu du le cmavo That is well formed, but it's probably not what you want. In general, {du} isn't very useful in most contexts, and should be avoided if possible. It says that two things have the same identity. So what you're saying is that 'zo xu' (that is, the word 'xu') has the same identity as 'le cmavo', that is, the thing or things that I call "the cmavo". So it could be correct, but it's more "That thing I've been calling the cmavo? It's 'xu'." It doesn't mean "the word xu is a cmavo", that's still just 'zo xu cmavo' > Not sure if that also means all cmavo are 'xu' (which is false) but > having not yet mastered lojban numbers I'm definitely stretching to > use 'du' as a selbri. If you wanted to say all cmavo are xu, that *would* be a place where du would be meaningful. xu ro cmavo cu du zo xu .i li'o na go'i "Are all cmavo 'xu'?" "Of course not!" In general, I really wish du didn't even exist. For the few times it's actually needed one could use dunli instead, and it tends to just get overused by newbies when there are better solutions out there. (No offense meant, by the way--I'm criticizing the language for confusing you, not you for being confused). -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home. -- (Terry Pratchett & Neil Gaiman, Good Omens)