From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Apr 01 10:27:40 2008
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.68)	(envelope-from <nobody@digitalkingdom.org>)	id 1JgkGp-0001U2-GT	for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:27:40 -0700
Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.46.155])	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68)	(envelope-from <picos.picos@gmail.com>)	id 1JgkGj-0001Hy-N0	for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:27:39 -0700
Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 5so251283ywm.46        for <lojban-beginners@lojban.org>; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; 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:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;        bh=PMBIJJQ4COjz6XajZebjK2ZGcaP8nbKbFMSpr4YrlVg=;        b=IPobVnwLaYDyT038FytxFvZaSiLATactRoNVFAUbuMHO1hksSsLGPqYTK8DqC6ofZyhryHPlH5brgHLdbv0uSps9HgP+9GPI3wapmjnqNxFT91HqKPe3Mkew3svVhLGRDBm4cfrE41EXMWEHl8/w3CsZwPZ93tKJhp/AYgnNU90=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;        d=gmail.com; s=beta;        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;        b=a/ertD0agPpzbsVGTSlqd5U9YUtrw9xHDGlfKic/sdjEfwNkiyWpcR3JpRy2CQb9epyCIaIOVHDov3WPJuaXSDGFYnICCfDEgn6lrULnH7ZrspUpkMKxE/igwjEFt51P0zybeCXxI6Rv07JSAux43pPqfz5sr36kTeaAisDSH5g=
Received: by 10.114.36.1 with SMTP id j1mr12847317waj.119.1207070836955;        Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.136.19 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 10:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <2f91285f0804011027x57cd21b8o765094103d8fd34b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 19:27:16 +0200
From: "Vid Sintef" <picos.picos@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: zo bo
In-Reply-To: <925d17560804010848o1805477mffd4263d23bde906@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <2f91285f0803310712u446302b6j9a3b70fe3f68091c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <925d17560803311201x1190fa3j788d108a5c8e16bb@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2f91285f0803311529w7550b697r3e98191ad129377c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <925d17560803311701n7fe0ef4bgd5585529580cfc82@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2f91285f0804010045l54aa4d21q5c56697fafc458e2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <925d17560804010602u2dd4a6bek5876e5f6808c3310@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2f91285f0804010710x33ec6a3ak5218856e8ba9bad1@mail.gmail.com>
	 <925d17560804010732s789875cob48694bd7f4b8e0f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2f91285f0804010829x792696efrb909039ab4e476a3@mail.gmail.com>
	 <925d17560804010848o1805477mffd4263d23bde906@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0
X-Spam-Score-Int: 0
X-Spam-Bar: /
X-archive-position: 426
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

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > pu broda .i nau bo brode -> lo nu broda cu nau purci lo nu brode (or,
>  > lo nu broda cu purci lo nu nau brode)
>
>  But won't {lo nu nelci} always remain in the past of {lo nu prami}, not
>  just right now?

{lo nu nelci} may recur in the future, after {lo nu prami}. That will
reverse the relationship: {lo nu prami cu purci lo nu nelci}. But
right now/here it's {lo nu nelci} which is before the other, therefore
{lo nu nelci cu nau purci lo nu prami}. Or it can be the other way
arouond: {mi} had been used to love {do} before they became just
friends, which is now being followed by the event of {mi} loving {do}
again.

>  And the fact that right now they are in the purci
>  relationship with one another doesn't tell us which one of the two
>  (if any) is happening right now.
>  In any case, I wasn't really asking for a rephrasing, but for a selbri
>  such that {nau} = {fi'o xxxxx}. Once we have that selbri, and assuming
>  it has two arguments, we know how {nau} behaves as a connective.

I see.

Must {nau} and PU in {gi'e -tense- bo} always behave as a connective?
In {mi do pu nelci gi'e nau bo prami}, why is {nau} seen as a
connective while the two bridi are already logically connected by
{gi'e}?

mu'o mi'e vid