From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Mon Dec 20 11:56:36 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:56:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CgTe0-0000Bz-JS for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:56:36 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:56:36 -0800 To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: lo nanmu poi na va Message-ID: <20041220195636.GC20429@chain.digitalkingdom.org> References: <200412201937.iBKJb4IP012739@mole.e-mol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200412201937.iBKJb4IP012739@mole.e-mol.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 958 X-Approved-By: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.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: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 02:37:04PM -0500, Matt Arnold wrote: > When we want to be specific about singular/plural do we have to > use number words? Yes. > I have never understood gadri and I feel more confused about them > now than before. I thought your characterization of the BPFK's lo was certainly good enough. > Let me offer some more examples. I am translating an article > describing a progressive religious movement.* At one point I want > to say "All meaning and purpose are understood through personal > reason and observation rather than second-hand testimony." Dude, that's pretty hard-core. Seriously. I'd have to write at least one lujvo to get through that sentence. > {.i fi piro lo te vajni .e lo mukti cu jimpe ma'i lo seni'ikri .e > lo nu zgana seba'i lo se sitna} "All reasons for importance [that's not "meaning"] and motivations are subjects of understanding by the standard of result-beliefs [seni'ikri is, prima facia, inherently contradictory; can you give a full definition] and observations [you want a vau or kei here] instead of citation sources [you probably want lo te sitna]." > I didn't want to say a particular > reasoning, observation, or quote sources, just anything that would > qualify as such. Is this the sort of thing for which {lo} is > needed, for which {le} would not serve? That is exactly the sort of thing for which BPFK {lo} is intended, yes. > * (Slightly off topic, how the heck do I translate the adjective > "naturalistic," in the sense of no supernatural realm?) I've always called that "materialistic". Huh. I think I'll use that now. I would probably use marji or to'e mucti. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!" Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/