From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu May 24 03:56:33 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 24 May 2007 03:56:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HrAzW-000138-Bl for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 24 May 2007 03:56:24 -0700 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.230]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HrAzC-00012o-7c for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 24 May 2007 03:56:17 -0700 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id t11so297048wxc for ; Thu, 24 May 2007 03:55:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=AwyyJRlMMv7mR+TTxeaSSyApOaDShoiHN4p2jItK1Mwdoz4LycAXv4glC0s6RTxS80yFJK52nwaFBuj0YTvhAONYDaTrLX1iWzDoqlWJw+MyFbVfsRHgYfBUVRG+H+cNebuiDf/nInvK1bDm6XGOQ5Af+k/UY/utGqX9hzmm4f0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=TKbpXhTwGFbFOsYrXf8O4isOEz6pl2I37Gtb8KI2OElReZBxJYIq+sXhBFmBQE1TfhRqUPVTyKm0I0agAO5rgQU1TZ1S6LHk0odzoLji3mxPMpxTmhh5xSqwcb6UHRWy0Pam4K8TYoY/jhBc4CNlETsgYy1znDxBMlqGoDUeZKA= Received: by 10.70.91.16 with SMTP id o16mr1916306wxb.1180004157212; Thu, 24 May 2007 03:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.9.19 with HTTP; Thu, 24 May 2007 03:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2f91285f0705240355n78f40610g78eed65c9b031a1a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 11:55:57 +0100 From: "Vid Sintef" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: lojbanization In-Reply-To: <200705232237.02726.phma@phma.optus.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_77645_1997821.1180004157158" References: <2f91285f0705230545h102beb4q6548c42b932bf299@mail.gmail.com> <2f91285f0705230854s4b2cb0cl5e1f78454782267d@mail.gmail.com> <2f91285f0705230926w62a0bfcw84567c66230aacf2@mail.gmail.com> <200705232237.02726.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 4641 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: picos.picos@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners ------=_Part_77645_1997821.1180004157158 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On 5/24/07, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > {cu da} is ungrammatical. Is this what you mean?: > la'o gy. holon .gy. to li'o toi cu se pagbu gi'ecabo pagbu By {da} I wanted to mean "that which is ...". Actually I haven't got yet the grammar of {da}. I saw some people using a cmavo in the place of selbri without a real selbri following it. So I tried the same manner. But effectively ungrammatical. Sorry for that. The explanation of the etymology is verbose. How about this?: > zoi xy. holos .xy. xelso valsi zo mulno Yeah, far better. By the way, did you use {xy} because the language of it's content is {xelso}? And, in another case, {gy} for {glico}? If so, I didn't know that! Cool! {le go'i cu pu se finti} should be {le valsi pu se finti}. {le go'i} wouldn't refer back to {la'o gy holon gy}? > {fo la'o gy...} isn't right. It says that he used that book as raw > material > for the invention of the word "holon". > True. That part was a makeshift. Do you think replacing {fo} with {pe} would fix it? The date and page citation makes no sense. You are doing some vague > operation > on the numbers 1967 and 48, then saying that a number of pages equal to > the > result of the operation is a date. Try something like {1967moi nanca ju'e > 48moi paprysfe}. So, mine was an apparent malglico. It would've been useful if there were something like {fi'e} for "created/born in/on (year/date)". Vid ------=_Part_77645_1997821.1180004157158 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On 5/24/07, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
{cu da} is ungrammatical. Is this what you mean?:
la'o gy. holon .gy. to li'o toi cu se pagbu gi'ecabo pagbu

By {da} I wanted to mean "that which is ...".
Actually I haven't got yet the grammar of {da}. I saw some people using a cmavo in the place of selbri without a real selbri following it. So I tried the same manner. But effectively ungrammatical. Sorry for that.

The explanation of the etymology is verbose. How about this?:
zoi xy. holos .xy. xelso valsi zo mulno

Yeah, far better.
By the way, did you use {xy} because the language of it's content is {xelso}? And, in another case, {gy} for {glico}? If so, I didn't know that! Cool!

{le go'i cu pu se finti} should be {le valsi pu se finti}.

{le go'i} wouldn't refer back to {la'o gy holon gy}?
 
{fo la'o gy...} isn't right. It says that he used that book as raw material
for the invention of the word "holon".

True. That part was a makeshift.
Do you think replacing {fo} with {pe} would fix it?

The date and page citation makes no sense. You are doing some vague operation
on the numbers 1967 and 48, then saying that a number of pages equal to the
result of the operation is a date. Try something like {1967moi nanca ju'e
48moi paprysfe}.

So, mine was an apparent malglico.
It would've been useful if there were something like {fi'e} for "created/born in/on (year/date)".


Vid ------=_Part_77645_1997821.1180004157158--