From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Mar 23 14:13:33 2010 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NuBPo-00037l-9S for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:13:32 -0700 Received: from mail-pw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.160.53]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NuBPf-00035z-Nr for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:13:30 -0700 Received: by pwj10 with SMTP id 10so4567346pwj.40 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:13:16 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=trwPKXekKOw0jPDXqDxJiDObgQ3L70q4pWhn+JGTqfA=; b=aE4bxQKqbY51Q8BZVsmrthlxj6THoTXkgRliT3o1zkMOqikt+/frCBhE2XwQ8xfLZM Y2dtd1jjxqgw8QjidkTmPzAQJifomUzZvxl4qf8xpMhnVI+VSFN3hORDDCRDWSWAoEEH zrhiwh6B/5levbFcZzevuE9wlyN8f2JO+bSfI= 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:content-transfer-encoding; b=xLhdDr525JX+tuxPCh8A2dQsMzvIRmpYkS8zMwk3CHpkq36gHzRnuteFDZPsIq8LjK wT/aVqJBVFlD47hGaZF6Vrza5DthK3e4AvEZNhzuc55W/SY4Mc/5KWmoGcAuj66LsDzM aQfNoa3G2xdn/En5ejkGtYmQUJ4NHtss/30fE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.114.186.33 with SMTP id j33mr3895690waf.172.1269378796399; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:13:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <925d17561003231405x13cc5c30j38c738d432488a02@mail.gmail.com> References: <586963.6470.qm@web88001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <925d17561003231405x13cc5c30j38c738d432488a02@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:13:16 -0400 Message-ID: <96f789a61003231413t2117aa25sc34d6d12a20f6e3b@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: How verstaile is "nu" From: Michael Turniansky To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 3062 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 2010/3/23 Jorge Llambías : > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:39 PM, A. PIEKARSKI wrote: >> >> "We're having one [arguement] right now," said Mama, "about whether or not we have arguements!" >> >> {.i lu mi'o ca simda'a seisa'a la mamcribe ku cusku lojei mi'o cu simda'a}. >> >> I'm not arguing against the use of {lo du'u xukau} in general but this seems >> to be a case of where {lo jei} provides the 'neatest' solution. > > I don't see the problem in using "lo du'u xukau" there. > > (I also prefer "da'arsi'u" to "simda'a", and of course "cu" rather > than "ku", but that's just an aside.) > > Compare with any other indirect question: > >    mi'o ca da'arsi'u lo du'u mi'o da'arsi'u makau >    "We are arguing about what we argue about." > >    mi'o ca da'arsi'u lo du'u mi'o da'arsi'u xokau da >    "We are arguing about how many things we argue about." > >    mi'o ca da'arsi'u lo du'u mi'o da'arsi'u ko'a jikau ko'e >    "We are arguing about whether we argue about ko'a or about ko'e." > > and so on. Having a special shortcut for "du'u xukau" is not really necessary. > doi xorxes xu do da'asnu lo nu da'asnu lo du'u da'asnu .i .oi lo besna be mi cu cortu --gejsypa