From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 04 09:32:08 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 04 Jul 2006 09:32:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fxnom-0006pe-5g for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 09:32:08 -0700 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fxnol-0006pX-TN for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 09:32:08 -0700 Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 09:32:07 -0700 To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: CLL p 95 - huh? Message-ID: <20060704163207.GF9631@chain.digitalkingdom.org> References: <44AA1FD6.9030906@hypermetrics.com> <20060704080511.GE9631@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <44AA266B.60807@hypermetrics.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44AA266B.60807@hypermetrics.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 3323 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 03:27:23AM -0500, Hal Fulton wrote: > Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > >No; co ; co ; zdani co > >blanu. > > > > Ohh, yes, of course. That's a large part of my confusion, getting > those mixed up. > > >>What if I wanted to add internal sumti to the tertau in an > >>inverted tanru? Could I do it? > > > >zdani be mi co melbi le speni be mi > > > > OK... (house-of-me)-ish beautiful to-(spouse-of-me) ?? > Myhousefully-beautiful to spouse-of-me? No; that would be {zdani be mi melbi le speni be mi} (note the lack of co). Remember, the gloss for co is "of type", so it's "house of me of type beautiful to my spouse". > Hmm. Does this amount to an observative {zdani} with some > decoration?? Yes, but what you said would be an observative of melbi. > If we add {ta}... > > ta zdani be mi co melbi le speni be mi > > That is a my-house-ish type-of beautiful to-(my-spouse) ?? > > Is this saying something like "That is my house, and it is > beautiful to my spouse"? Yes, but that's not what you said. What you said is "That is a house-ish beautiful thing". > Could I say (without inversion): > - ta zdani be mi be'o cu melbi le speni be mi Illegal unless you drop the cu. If you drop the cu the meaning changes a lot, and you're talking about a house-ish-ly beautiful thing instead of a beautiful house. -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/