From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Jul 08 08:04:53 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sat, 08 Jul 2006 08:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FzEMT-0002QE-3c for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 08:04:50 -0700 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.182]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FzEML-0002Q3-DD for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 08:04:47 -0700 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x31so328225pye for ; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 08:04:38 -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=HhFKHGFdbpcVnOagqanBBMLp2U+Wd2tY871dQovEGNaI1iT2WEVuZj5Cwt4LVsa7aaphmK5IhQn8FCgxmnYWO3JRpN8UJvhFFiLOyIxP//MKBwvIKKlMhkvG4UyXSWUGUgu+y4oKg2FWPRg5bCuCcc7tTQj42LUb3XBfQe6qhZI= Received: by 10.35.129.19 with SMTP id g19mr2807856pyn; Sat, 08 Jul 2006 08:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.14.17 with HTTP; Sat, 8 Jul 2006 08:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d17560607080804k4565cc81la8c0203ef2e2a7a8@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 12:04:38 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: mu'o mi'e ... In-Reply-To: <526.317dd52.31e0ffba@wmconnect.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <526.317dd52.31e0ffba@wmconnect.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 3367 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On 7/8/06, MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com wrote: > Why do people say "mi'e" after "mu'o"? Shouldn't "mu'o" be last? {mu'o} and {mi'e} are in selma'o COI, so they are normally followed by a name. {mi'e} is followed by the speaker's name, all other COIs are followed by the name of the person being addressed. It is possible to say {mi'e xorxes mu'o}, two vocatives with the name left out in the second one, instead of {mu'o mi'e xorxes}, which is a single vocative construct. mu'o mi'e xorxes