From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 04 00:59:24 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FxfoZ-0006JK-Qk for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:59:23 -0700 Received: from ms-smtp-03.texas.rr.com ([24.93.47.42]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FxfoW-0006JA-T1 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:59:23 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.103] (cpe-66-68-161-49.austin.res.rr.com [66.68.161.49]) by ms-smtp-03.texas.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k647xI3X015349 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 02:59:19 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <44AA1FD6.9030906@hypermetrics.com> Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 02:59:18 -0500 From: Hal Fulton User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0RC1 (X11/20041209) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] CLL p 95 - huh? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 3317 X-Approved-By: hal9000@hypermetrics.com X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: hal9000@hypermetrics.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners I think I have finally understood this after quite some time puzzling over it. (I'm in the middle of p. 95 in the CLL.) I'm trying to summarize this without looking at the text, so please tell me if/when I'm wrong. In tanru inversion, we have co . But the place structure of the tanru is that of the seltau. So any sumti following the tanru are taken as sumti for the seltau. Correct?? The word "however" really confused me. I thought it was trying to say that the place structure was determinted by one gismu, but the sumti belonged to the other one! That's nonsense, isn't it? So the be-bei-be'o still confuses me a little. This can be omitted here, I guess, because the sumti belong to the tertau "just because"? What if I wanted to add internal sumti to the tertau in an inverted tanru? Could I do it? I'm trying to think of meaningful examples here, but I can't. 3 am in my timezone. :) Hal