From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Aug 17 06:30:26 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1E5Nzu-0005B2-0k for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:30:26 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.205]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1E5Nzo-0005Au-T7 for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:30:25 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i30so144511wra for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:30:19 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=p/m7vqF8gisRHYskdUsPvw0B8P+Vy3zPZOkzS0GwUNvPobMoOV2q4F/HL70F5PxPZ6jK374a5NO0eywvUOSqQJWj1cK9hljnSnfWxj8fvcweFystMRdxkbnuESdl1sbJ55d1wxyD3FuaMUZsL1NUq1vhyxA6qmp44csQRs7M4ug= Received: by 10.54.142.2 with SMTP id p2mr425024wrd; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:30:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.68.12 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:30:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d175605081706303f355307@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:30:19 -0300 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: alice questions In-Reply-To: <737b61f305081620163df3b83b@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <737b61f30508141443b15fcc7@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560508161657244f2bb8@mail.gmail.com> <737b61f305081620163df3b83b@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 1756 X-Approved-By: jjllambias@gmail.com 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: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners On 8/17/05, Chris Capel wrote: > Well, what I was getting at was, why is the {se} necessary, and why > doesn't it change the meaning to "pink body with eyes"? Wouldn't {poi > xunblabi kanla} mean "pink eyed" or "with pink eyes"? {lo blabi ractu poi xunblabi kanla ke'a} would mean that. But when {ke'a} is not explicit, the most common interpretation is that it fills the first empty slot, so my first take on {lo blabi ractu poi xunblabi kanla} might be "a white rabbit which is a pink eye", i.e. {lo blabi ractu poi ke'a xunblabi kanla}. The intent was {lo blabi ractu poi [ke'a] xunblabi se kanla}. > > > Oh, and why the {poi}? Oughtn't it be {lo blabi ractu noi kanla > > > noi xunblabi}? > > > > (The two noi's there modify {lo blabi ractu}.) > > Is there a way to nest poi/noi clauses? The problem is that {kanla} there is not a sumti, and you can't attach a noi clause to a selbri. (The normal way of attaching more than one clause to the same sumti is by joining the clauses with {zi'e}, so {ko'a noi broda noi brode} is ungrammatical, it has to be {ko'a noi broda zi'e noi brode}, but because clauses can be attached before and after the {ku} to a sumti like {lo broda ku}, this allows {lo broda noi brode [ku] noi brodi} which is like what you have there.) > > I don't see a problem with {poi} here. It restricts the sense of {blabi ractu} > > to just those that have pink eyes. > > It feels uncomfortable to me because the restrictive sense doesn't > seem to be adding any information, and as a listener I would wonder > whether I were missing some subtlety that required the {poi} to > communicate something. {poi} would be strange if we already had {lo blabi ractu} identified, but if I remember right this is the first time it appears, so I don't see a problem with making the eyes part of the identification information. What else could it communicate? When would you use {poi}? (There is also a difference between {lo broda noi brode [ku]} and {lo broda ku noi brode}. To use {noi} here would require a {ku} otherwise we would be saying that white rabbits have pink eyes irrespective of this white rabbit in particular. I don't know that I want to insist on this (mis?)feature of {noi}, but it probably influenced me at the time. See for more than you probably want to know.) mu'o mi'e xorxes