From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Mar 13 08:27:02 2010 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:27:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NqUB4-0002Uh-1r for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:27:02 -0800 Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.212.53]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NqUAx-0002TR-VC for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:26:59 -0800 Received: by vws7 with SMTP id 7so217247vws.40 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:26:49 -0800 (PST) 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=u3N+1STmmTzCOTrZOzIqC/NjoHBfUIAG70ZAuEpIQ5c=; b=xQDGVhjEWhJU9TIU2QVUEEIDE/JUjLXlnNDpwcKFky3e6I1YUn9NZptADJ+ESlz4XS ET9Sm71voZ/mlzihN40CoPr6R/g/9DEJ6KqszoYrsRZlwZu6d2fSk1G6PwSTt3G1CB3v M7Y2sMjUBS3Xv9qvV0hUWRnbAbQW1kruFNuV4= 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=Et2Ynh9UhsthVUscGYf/BPjjajdFh1jqthhJb9BdBaYJouUr6V8EM2azHzHcqw+3/J nHQ1cGfsz7X9DDIuOqwfQHpIhaNRmed/TwPJzNFBkMYQbPf7pUpZkha0l/HdvGVJWzXA KrRyJYsjKiqsYffwghMB72hojRHZdpnbI1JlE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.108.198 with SMTP id g6mr1977677vcp.68.1268497609430; Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:26:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <925d17561003130806t592c146k934fc70f4dfb99dd@mail.gmail.com> References: <4de8c3931003130452v3473ee1ei70da65f022ac2b1b@mail.gmail.com> <925d17561003130713o346dd22lbe1cb8cf25c66f1c@mail.gmail.com> <5715b9301003130746x7347e6a3u3c38970be7c55316@mail.gmail.com> <925d17561003130806t592c146k934fc70f4dfb99dd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 11:26:49 -0500 Message-ID: <5715b9301003130826v38796202i1d23f3c09809ca2d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: How versatile is "nu"? From: Luke Bergen To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f8e5cce6898dc0481b11d41 X-archive-position: 2993 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 --00c09f8e5cce6898dc0481b11d41 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > So you object to: > > mi viska lo nu lo nanmu cu bajra > > ? Good point. I suppose I can't really object to that for practical reasons. It just feels strange to me. I understand myself to be seeing a man who i= s running as opposed to the event of running itself. > They might be as appropriate, if you like marking distinctions that are > already inherent in the meaning I don't like using distinctions that are redundant. But there are times where I would like to specify that I for example {pu'u kukte} instead of {za'i kukte} and where I want to be more specific than just {nu kukte} 2010/3/13 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Luke Bergen > wrote: > > You don't think events are abstract? I don't think I can see the event > of > > running for example. I can see a man who is running, but the event > itself > > seems like an un-seeable thing. > > So you object to: > > mi viska lo nu lo nanmu cu bajra > > ? > > For me events are spatiotemporal objects, and as such they can often > be seen. Do events have spatial extension? > > > ta'onai I find myself (un-desirably) just using {nu} out of laziness. = I > > really want to memorize za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e so I can start using them > > regularly where they might be more appropriate. > > They are never *more* appropriate, since "nu" always covers them. They > might be as appropriate, if you like marking distinctions that are > already inherent in the meaning (a bit like gender and number > agreement of adjectives with their noun, for example). > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > > > --00c09f8e5cce6898dc0481b11d41 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> So you object to:
>=A0
> =A0 =A0mi viska lo nu lo nan= mu cu bajra
>=A0
> ?

Good point. =A0I = suppose I can't really object to that for practical reasons. =A0It just= feels strange to me. =A0I understand myself to be seeing a man who is runn= ing as opposed to the event of running itself.

> They=A0might be as appropriate, if you like markin= g distinctions that are
> already inherent in the meaning
<= br>
I don't like using distinctions that are redundant. =A0Bu= t there are times where I would like to specify that I for example {pu'= u kukte} instead of {za'i kukte} and where I want to be more specific t= han just {nu kukte}

2010/3/13 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> You don't think events are abstract? =A0I don't think I can se= e the event of
> running for example. =A0I can see a man who is=A0running, but the even= t itself
> seems like an un-seeable thing.

So you object to:

=A0 =A0mi viska lo nu lo nanmu cu bajra

?

For me events are spatiotemporal objects, and as such they can often
be seen. Do events have spatial extension?

> ta'onai I find myself (un-desirably) just using {nu} out of lazine= ss. =A0I
> really want to memorize=A0za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e so I can= start using them
> regularly where they might be more appropriate.

They are never *more* appropriate, since "nu" always covers= them. They
might be as appropriate, if you like marking distinctions that are
already inherent in the meaning (a bit like gender and number
agreement of adjectives with their noun, for example).

mu'o mi'e xorxes




--00c09f8e5cce6898dc0481b11d41--