From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 01 09:12:01 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KDiSX-0008Ry-Ed for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:12:01 -0700 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.243]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KDiSJ-0008MA-97 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:12:01 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b17so1731388rvf.46 for ; Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:11:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; 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=kvCXqHI/hrwgCoFPEZGIJk2yUbvyF/CeImL6GkB/Ivg=; b=khBstiCSCKEXRBPQouwgPcJ2qnfOhbk5J92H9FUyJOQZFsCEGh7XawlUfyU6HoZdxY 5KQMbYzdEPwzhya+A200CRbg+91MIP34/PxLm55JmClSpKtGolTUMSD9xaRDA3fuEMko MXQAfVuaTs0LceCms35RNJaEvirPy2QLQTXXM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=Cc6tFfH/BDRqTK6rPKSYjcBtD9CR5Hnt2aEm4zdwWs6Ge1gxZPYNL+M5P4Pzy/QCvT IJbTAv1vkyh2WffKHtVfL5SDRilA/G7VKMkWDJ+KO496/mysX2vAd1psxR61+3Pvp3+R bubsF2tc+JpXiYYQLkwR1zh7+U36HMU4I2K/4= Received: by 10.141.43.5 with SMTP id v5mr3662636rvj.216.1214928701720; Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.179.16 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <96f789a60807010911t711b869et30c635b37ab35e66@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:11:41 -0400 From: "Michael Turniansky" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: tanru order In-Reply-To: <925d17560806290845n1b2a591vfa042cb4bb7a5f7a@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: <737b61f30806281910q2e8c38e1x1efdd2b8e4ef87ab@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560806290645l23118bbeyaa71d7dfa0b13bdb@mail.gmail.com> <737b61f30806290816t5663ce55s341e7eb9f3762986@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560806290845n1b2a591vfa042cb4bb7a5f7a@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 663 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mturniansky@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Jorge Llambías wrote: > On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Chris Capel wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Jorge Llambías wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Chris Capel wrote: >>>> When you have things like {vajni mutce} and {manku mulno}, you're >>>> usually going to want to reverse those, right? >>> >>> Why? They would be something like {mutce be lo ka vajni} and >>> {mulno be lo ka manku}. The expansion for the other order is >>> perhaps also possible, but more compicated. >> >> I'm not sure I was clear here. I simply meant to ask whether {mutce >> vajni} and {mulno manku} would usually be the better order. > > Yes, that's how I understood the question. Why would that > be the better order, given that it requires a more complex > interpretation? > >>>> iseja'ebo na _vajni mutce_ fa le du'u porsi makau ki'u le nu abu ka'e >>>> spuda no le re preti >>> >>>> But I think the first, since the x1 is >>>> filled, is actually incorrect, since the fact is ke not important >>>> ke'e, not ke not extreme ke'e. >>> >>> Its "not (extreme in importance)", isn't it? >> >> Yes, where the "importance" is the main concept, and thus belongs in >> the tertau. Can't {mutce vajni} naturally mean "extreme in importance" >> in context? > > What if it was "lacking in importance"? What is the main > concept there, and would that be better as {vajni claxu} or as > {claxu vajni}? > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > You know, xorxes, I think I can finally put my finger on what's always bothered me about your interpretations of those tanru orderings. IF the tanru had been "ka vajni kei mutce" (An importance-type of muchness") THEN I could see your POV that it means "mutce be lo ka vajni") But without the ka, "vajni mutce" means (to me) an important muchness, that is to say, that the extreme thing itself is important, but not necessarily that it extreme in the quailty of being important. For example, I can easily see "mi vajni mutce be lo ka bebna" --- I am an important superfool. Things in the seltau position tend to be interpreted adjectivally/adverbially, as well they should be, since they are supposed to modify the tertau (which would therefore be treated nounally, verbally, (or adverbially if they followed by another brivla)) Without the ka in the tanru, it also requires mental massaging to get "vajni mutce" into "mutce be lo ka vajni". I think one test to figure out which gismu belongs in the tertau spot is to figure out which is more germaine. And the easiest way to test that is to test dropping each term from the sentenc,e and see which one most obscures the meaning when it is left out: na vajni fa le du'u porsi makau ki'u le nu abu ka'e spuda no le re preti na mutce fa le du'u porsi makau ki'u le nu abu ka'e spuda no le re preti Hmmm... we either have something that's not important or something that's not much. It's a close call in this case, but I think "vajni" wins out as being more germaine, IMHO ---gejyspa