From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Apr 10 17:05:40 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FT6O4-0002v8-MN for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:05:40 -0700 Received: from web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.1]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FT6O2-0002uz-Qv for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:05:40 -0700 Received: (qmail 8894 invoked by uid 60001); 11 Apr 2006 00:05:37 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=EWbT123NBfQx6Qcs72H6KpOReHSNvZWjtd9PYQStCV+h6/6PI5nGEZ5BoRcYV5HJyxyHudzyJnFtowSaE5zv9BK1RgMVqM/QdnFbJmtYByzP5cOJ1kC+syhymx/JwM28LUb4lqmnBjWD2/Hu2QgHvdz4gXjjkMCDqFKnUibPXTM= ; Message-ID: <20060411000537.8892.qmail@web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [69.205.36.41] by web36501.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:05:37 PDT Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:05:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrew Heathwaite Subject: [lojban-beginners] association (pe/be) To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-archive-position: 3144 X-Approved-By: jkominek@miranda.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: gtrpkt@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners coi I have a question about 'pe' and 'be'. As I understand it, one would use 'pe' to show a vague association between two things, which is often a sort of possession. For example, using kanba: kanba - x1 is a goat/angora/[billy-goat/kid] of species/breed x2 le kanba pe mi the goat associated with me my goat But when the brivla has a place for an "owner", one should use an internal sumti with 'be' instead of 'pe'. For example, the place structure of zdani: x1 is a nest/house/lair/den/[home] of/for x2 To say 'my home', one would say: le zdani be mi the house of me my house 'be' makes 'mi' fill the x2 place of zdani. This is more explicit than using 'pe', so it is preferred, yes? If there were a third place in kanba for the owner (caretaker, what have you) of the goat, we'd use 'be' with kanba in this instance, but since there is no such place, we don't, yes? Now we have a shortened way of showing association by putting the associated thing between the main thing and the article: le mi kanba the me goat my goat which means exactly the same thing as: le kanba pe mi As I understand it, we can include 'pe' in this sort of phrase, if we want: le pe mi kanba the of me goat my goat which means exactly the same as the above This brings me to my main question, which is, can we use 'be' the same way to show an explicit association using the place structure of the main brivla? For example: le be mi zdani the of me home my home Is this grammatical? If not, does that mean that whenever we want to say "my home", we have to say "le zdani be mi" and there's no way to switch them around? Thanks in advance for your response. I've looked this up in The Complete Lojban Language, but I still wasn't sure. .io ki'e mu'o mi'e .andros. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com