From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Aug 20 09:07:47 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:07:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MeAB0-0006Dz-Oo for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:07:47 -0700 Received: from mail-vw0-f179.google.com ([209.85.212.179]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MeAAu-0006Ct-NI for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:07:46 -0700 Received: by vws9 with SMTP id 9so4377858vws.25 for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:07:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=batQb9INCCxu97xWbM1fXCX92R5bRlt9esmizfF/cS0=; b=Qst/YQ9DemyY9+5W5AcGq/UX4wf+DatI4iuKnx71pXOYsZi8FSelKYK/K/Nr5J6cW4 SV4DpS68QPQIPQ2sI1zZnxUSDt3Hs2jP26fmq3LAaoFxUPAHlJW5cNH4nybGiig3Ki+P 1myFakWX+UOgAZQauxjPBWXCP7WDzxJaddHbQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=pw/YTZDeJj79TfBxgAmP1pd5o1qV+AZhMrwejJFkvK7kjOe2W+LonL4vB8s/183Kuh AxPAW4BUGU0lnOvrEA7WVMAwM82GEadhGIvEEtudrO245LhZnKzOd/vK6tchovdWJ9sk R/IbifOC6JC20vugMqWjB+LVlBFWb/Qleylcw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.16.205 with SMTP id p13mr11221676vca.56.1250784453924; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:07:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4de8c3930908200900gb58db68ycbfb28af3d9542d7@mail.gmail.com> References: <4de8c3930908200722q955bd1x8bc039ed44060420@mail.gmail.com> <5715b9300908200731lc1a4ba8s642007a3a81afdba@mail.gmail.com> <4de8c3930908200900gb58db68ycbfb28af3d9542d7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:07:33 -0400 Message-ID: <5715b9300908200907p7514b599g5bd91f2393ac8e2d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Referring to selma'o in Lojban From: Luke Bergen To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175cd89e11199c047194f3c6 X-archive-position: 2057 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners --0015175cd89e11199c047194f3c6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit oh wow, that's a good one. does the {zo} quote the {zei} or since {zei} is "magic" does it take {zo} litterally? Or does none of that happen because {si} says "nope, I didn't mean to say {zei} there". Hmmm, that brings up a more general question for me. Does {si} juts erase a word or does it erase the word and any proto-text results of having said that word. e.g. if I say {lo gerku goi ko'a si si} have I merely erased the words {goi ko'a} or have I erased the words and the pro-sumti assignment that resulted from their being spoken? Or, if I say {mi klama lo zdani sa} and then someone else says {go'i} are they referring to {mi klama lo zdani} or whatever came before it? I'm sure there are better examples than those. Those were just the first ones to come to mind. On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:00 PM, tijlan wrote: > 2009/8/20 Luke Bergen : > > ooo, that's interesting? So in {ba'e zei selma'o} does the {zei} > evaluate > > first and create the lujvo first or does {ba'e} evaluate first and say > "this > > is REALLY a lujvo"? > > > > I don't know why I find battle between words so interesting {zo si si si} > > etc... > > This one is knotty too: zo zei si zei bu. > > Or maybe not. I would like the idea that {zo}, {si}, and {bu} are the > equal components of the lujvo combined with the inner two {zei}. > > > > --0015175cd89e11199c047194f3c6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable oh wow, that's a good one.=A0 does the {zo} quote the {zei} or since {z= ei} is "magic" does it take {zo} litterally?=A0 Or does none of t= hat happen because {si} says "nope, I didn't mean to say {zei} the= re".=A0 Hmmm, that brings up a more general question for me.=A0

Does {si} juts erase a word or does it erase the word and any proto-tex= t results of having said that word.=A0 e.g. if I say {lo gerku goi ko'a= si si} have I merely erased the words {goi ko'a} or have I erased the = words and the pro-sumti assignment that resulted from their being spoken?= =A0 Or, if I say {mi klama lo zdani sa} and then someone else says {go'= i} are they referring to {mi klama lo zdani} or whatever came before it?
I'm sure there are better examples than those.=A0 Those were just t= he first ones to come to mind.


On Thu= , Aug 20, 2009 at 12:00 PM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
2009/8/20 Luke Be= rgen <lukeabergen@gmail.com= >:
> ooo, that's interesting?=A0 So in {ba'e zei = selma'o} does the {zei} evaluate
> first and create the lujvo first or does {ba'e} evaluate first and= say "this
> is REALLY a lujvo"?
>
> I don't know why I find battle between words so interesting {zo si= si si}
> etc...

This one is knotty too: zo zei si zei bu.

Or maybe not. I would like the idea that {zo}, {si}, and {bu} are the
equal components of the lujvo combined with the inner two {zei}.




--0015175cd89e11199c047194f3c6--