From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Jul 14 12:05:29 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:05:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1Bkp4L-0003dl-AA for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:05:29 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:05:29 -0700 To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Articles to Refer to Words Themselves Message-ID: <20040714190529.GI20885@chain.digitalkingdom.org> References: <20040331025859.M31434@fresco.Math.McGill.CA> <20040331192943.GO16966@digitalkingdom.org> <40F32C10.5010706@nc.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 650 X-Approved-By: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 08:29:09PM +0200, jexOm. wrote: > coi travis .i mi'e jexOm. > > Le 13 juil. 04, ? 02:25, Travis Garris a ?crit : > > >I'm baffled as to which articles, or abstractions, I would use to > >specify a word itself, and not its meaning. For example, "Bye is a > >short form of goodbye." The example I was using at the time was {vol > >rafsi volfi}. That starts to look like a tanru, so I tried to put > >something in to break up rafsi and volfi. Only think I could come up > >with is {vol rafsi zo volfi}. That borrows from (now optional) > >English grammar rules. I'm sure it gets the point across, but I'm > >sure there is a better way to do it. > > As for your first try, istead of {vol rafsi volfi}, it should be {vol > cu rafsi vofli}. {cu} indicates when the selbri starts. But, you need > to use a quotation in order to tell that you are speaking of the > words. So, it would give: {zo vol cu rafsi zo vofli}. Correct except that rafsi are not, in general, valid Lojban words. In this case it can be treated as a cmene, but in general one must use zoi. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"