From blindbravado@gmail.com Mon Feb 08 18:20:26 2010 Received: from mail-ew0-f223.google.com ([209.85.219.223]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Nefi9-0005PN-Ez for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:20:24 -0800 Received: by ewy23 with SMTP id 23so93269ewy.4 for ; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:20:15 -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=DXms+JTe7DQEEoPK76Do8W7zJiVL6WQwMhpPjXpncpQ=; b=CP7R/XKUG7kfgBfqbCCi+Xx5pYeIyOdbHG4NjruhbL3YN4ISLex6egY6hibiJVCn3S LBDKEox4GV9y9ulwDemHq1Z1HnAnyo/6Jy7XIaza1K7Ob9ezj9GP4ojmoBba22dqIxzB K6D6egQEBjq4i8E7BTLqFrY8ecwa+aquwKZzU= 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=kA3FGZy0KKeDxg7iknRql3aLxfIzvsj2NuCeV3ShLVIxg90WJ0mtmdUXWhQEtb/JBL hqQS+DNJE0esiC5UbwtIPHAqv0cbbhWeqKAVyQTm9HjKn1v5dhKiVfuaD8jMBTszgsPJ F2V7H/b7C51cC87SCMnB1z9Te1ohD2FpnEPMM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.76.65 with SMTP id b1mr2547083ebk.65.1265682015022; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:20:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <249d5b951002081740h256fa074h5cef4ff8990ee2ed@mail.gmail.com> References: <218950.62113.qm@web46104.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <925d17561002081358if4eddacl7ccc619f0da8af3a@mail.gmail.com> <715718.90598.qm@web46101.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <249d5b951002081740h256fa074h5cef4ff8990ee2ed@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 21:20:14 -0500 Message-ID: <1f1080831002081820q228ee8efo4473981694ef46a1@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: Help! The Xorlo are attacking! From: Ian Johnson To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f7d599ce76fe7047f218ef6 --00c09f7d599ce76fe7047f218ef6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I don't understand it going quite THAT far. I'm pretty sure la is still normal for cmene, and le IS still more "specific" than lo, if that specificity is wanted. Maybe not, though; I've only just recently started learning about xorlo after previously using LfB's version of lo. mu'omi'e latros. On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 8:40 PM, MorphemeAddict wrote: > As I understand xorlo, lo is for any and all instances of gadri from > selma'o LE, not just when one is unsure of which to use. In other words, it > makes all the other cmavo in LE obsolete. > > stevo > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Whipsnerd Lhooser < > synaptic.explosion@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Thank you xorxes. So, allow me to re-iterate: >> >> xorlo simply refers to the idea that in an instance where a lojbanist is >> unsure of the proper gadri to be utilized, the default is lo. >> >> gadri is the lojban equivalent of an English article (I do understand the >> principle of malglico, however I'm using this for reference) >> >> la: Used only for cmene; Is the article which immediately proceeds a cmene >> / it designates the next word as a cmene. >> >> le: A gadri which denotes a specific thing/instance which the speaker has >> in mind. (le is optional and may be substituted for lo) >> >> lo: A gadri which introduces a thing/instance. (Specific or non-specific) >> >> loi: A gadri which says that an attribute/action that is being applied to >> a group is being applied to that group as a whole, not necessarily to the >> individuals comprising that group. >> >> Is this more correct? >> ** >> >> > --00c09f7d599ce76fe7047f218ef6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I don't understand it going quite THAT far. I'm pretty sure la is s= till normal for cmene, and le IS still more "specific" than lo, i= f that specificity is wanted. Maybe not, though; I've only just recentl= y started learning about xorlo after previously using LfB's version of = lo.

mu'omi'e latros.

On Mon, Feb = 8, 2010 at 8:40 PM, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:
As I understand xorlo, lo is for any and all instances of gadri from s= elma'o LE, not just when one is unsure of which to use. In other words,= it makes all the other cmavo in LE obsolete.
=A0
stevo

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Whipsnerd Lhoose= r <synaptic.explosion@yahoo.com> wrote:
Thank you xorxes. So, allow me to re-iterate:

xorlo simply refe= rs to the idea that in an instance where a lojbanist is unsure of the prope= r gadri to be utilized, the default is lo.

gadri is the lojban equiv= alent of an English article (I do understand the principle of malglico, how= ever I'm using this for reference)

la: Used only for cmene; Is the article which immediately proceeds a cm= ene / it designates the next word as a cmene.

le: A gadri which deno= tes a specific thing/instance which the speaker has in mind. (le is optiona= l and may be substituted for lo)

lo: A gadri which introduces a thing/instance. (Specific or non-specifi= c)

loi: A gadri which says that an attribute/action that is being = applied to a group is being applied to that group as a whole, not necessari= ly to the individuals comprising that group.

Is this more correct?




--00c09f7d599ce76fe7047f218ef6--