From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jan 15 08:55:01 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:04:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JEp40-0002pu-QQ for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:55:01 -0800 Received: from express.cec.wustl.edu ([128.252.21.16]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JEp3w-0002pY-0u for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:55:00 -0800 Received: from hive.cec.wustl.edu (hive.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.14]) by express.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0FGsdEU001268 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:54:39 -0600 (CST) Received: from hive.cec.wustl.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by hive.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0FGsdCl030224; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:54:39 -0600 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by hive.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) with ESMTP id m0FGsdYH030221; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:54:39 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: hive.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:54:39 -0600 (CST) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: zo fu'e .e zo fu'o In-Reply-To: <12d58c160801150843v6ddc2d25kea9ce69c22fc1c0f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20080113181320.g23v4ke00ksos8oc@webmail.ixkey.info> <12d58c160801150843v6ddc2d25kea9ce69c22fc1c0f@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 247 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: adam@pubcrawler.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, komfo,amonan wrote: > All these usages seem to be grammatically sound. Agreed. > .i mi klama lo zarci .e fu'e lo panka fu'o .ui > > (I'm happy about going to the park.) > > Not sure how this would be different from the shorter {mi klama lo zarci .e > lo panka .ui} or {mi klama lo zarci .e lo .ui panka} Well, it's different from {mi klama lo zarci .e lo panka .ui}, because the {.ui} is modifying the entire sumti ({lo panka}) instead of just the selbri there ({panka}). Subtle difference, but real. It's the same (effectively) as {mi klama lo zarci .e lo .ui panka} and {mi klama lo zarci .e lo panka ku .ui} > .i mi klama fu'e lo zarci .e lo panka fu'o .ui > > (I'm happy about going to both the market & the park.) > > > .i mi klama lo zarci fu'e .e fu'o .ui lo panka > > (I'm happy that I'm going to both, as opposed to some other relation.) > > > Not sure how this would be different from {mi klama lo zarci .e .ui lo > panka} Really no difference, I think. > > .i fu'e mi klama fu'o .ui lo zarci .e lo panka > > (I'm happy about the going, and about it being me that's going.) > > > > .i mi fu'e klama lo zarci fu'o .ui .e lo panka > > (I'm happy about the going, and about it being to the market.) > > > > And how about taking it to another level: > > .i mi klama lo panka fu'e .ui fu'o .ui > > (I'm happy about going to the park, and happy about the happiness.) That last one seems odd to me, but it may be correct. At the very least it's novel. -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ Coffee: Good to the last drop, and I intend to be the last to drop.