From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Jun 04 08:44:38 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MCF7M-00011u-K2 for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:44:37 -0700 Received: from mail-qy0-f186.google.com ([209.85.221.186]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MCF7G-00010T-IX for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:44:36 -0700 Received: by qyk16 with SMTP id 16so862255qyk.28 for ; Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:44:24 -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=HUQrOprejEm9dAm51z6zFWZvepU+FFtD1+teGGLIQF4=; b=TTmxLrXL+562rHX0QCQfPkl0PF5fNiLYCdGYbuUKGDSN00adUnhp2419kdSNyADgh+ cUSS35P7Zw6GCuCRxS4+hh7JhIyPOMG2n9f9pIr55lJ+E+hSUToR22q6qjhMAaJchnQn Cf7JVSOp5OM/1h8OEJt+PaveuuFiYirmLOkN4= 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=JDJ/uLY3zrAqd82/9YW1w8ss0lsxtdyDYs87yYNnnIuyyFHMI+KvrHpswHzd1gmZDG pR/35EOhWx/YIG4L5FgIbzwYU1fA6LugViFyAM/66yaI2xZRxXfbt58C5bRofhEAa6AQ pleO3jGjsyF4faAvtph8wjdo06k5R29PoGqSM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.137.9 with SMTP id k9mr3849983ybd.59.1244130264445; Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:44:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <925d17560906040726u73c448fey6bb5c1379f88b53f@mail.gmail.com> References: <4de8c3930905311309u20c6e72xffaa964ae140d208@mail.gmail.com> <20090531202510.GA13449@sdf.lonestar.org> <4de8c3930905311402s14e9d50y3b35466d51b4f25f@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560906010539m2be6b21dg6008b8865668a909@mail.gmail.com> <96f789a60906040640q6a9d21c7rc2ec597d190576ac@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560906040726u73c448fey6bb5c1379f88b53f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 11:44:24 -0400 Message-ID: <96f789a60906040844y4ea89084nfb6ccd7137763b63@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: broda moi 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: 1768 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 2009/6/4 Jorge Llambías : > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Michael Turniansky > wrote: >>> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 6:02 PM, tijlan wrote: >>>>I suppose "da me lo broda moi" or "lo me lo broda moi cu brode" is >>>>valid. > > I think you have seen it before, although perhaps only with pronouns, > "me mi moi", "me do moi". I'm quite sure I have used it in things you > have read. Yes, now that you mention it, I have seen you use this. > > >> Is this >> construct in the CLL?  If so, where?) > > Ch 18. Sect 11: > Thanks for the pointer. > > The use of "me (sumti) moi" to mean "x1 is (sumti)'s" is not mentioned > in CLL however, it is a latter innovation. Do you find any particular need/aesthetic value in using this construct rather than a NOI or GOI (or in the case of selbri use, ponse, srana, ckini, steci and the like)? It seems like a very odd thing to me to take something with no "numerosity" associated with it, and combine it with a cardinality aspect. --gejyspa