Received: from mail-bk0-f61.google.com ([209.85.214.61]:60001)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCL3SuIvlExC28L6BBRoEcUGkfA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1T2lBu-000469-Ac; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 08:44:15 -0700
Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4sf1553332bkw.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 08:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-authenticated:x-provags-id:message-id
         :date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to
         :x-y-gmx-trusted:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results
         :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id
         :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe
         :list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=itYDMqxPUd0gykl/f84ZxoMt++GcauyoijJKTzVMYS4=;
        b=z7OVZFqQ//Jc3JMwgdhAdpUs/4nXeNt97qrQCTinJLVkckyrizy5O3wbdIKOZyFhh5
         oHoBV03Rqd/yo8L7NypNVvhXh+tUce35uz4128/b5eu98A3+j1tDs1Q3NasAUPNE8HiT
         vPKmfwmV6GTvPyrAJSmv1okITVbTbbruyEOoU=
Received: by 10.216.94.4 with SMTP id m4mr191644wef.27.1345304630398;
        Sat, 18 Aug 2012 08:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.216.209.206 with SMTP id s56ls5334488weo.1.gmail; Sat, 18 Aug
 2012 08:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.105.2 with SMTP id gi2mr1087020wib.4.1345304629691;
        Sat, 18 Aug 2012 08:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.105.2 with SMTP id gi2mr1087019wib.4.1345304629681;
        Sat, 18 Aug 2012 08:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net. [213.165.64.23])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id cx9si1901675wib.0.2012.08.18.08.43.49;
        Sat, 18 Aug 2012 08:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.23 as permitted sender) client-ip=213.165.64.23;
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2012 15:43:49 -0000
Received: from p57A085EF.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.33]) [87.160.133.239]
  by mail.gmx.net (mp069) with SMTP; 18 Aug 2012 17:43:49 +0200
X-Authenticated: #54293076
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/pIf9GWFHp1SAsS6297p5onWGcPGI8siUZIo9hmt
	QiQ6m6/o7POc8a
Message-ID: <502FB833.10702@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 17:43:47 +0200
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Let's move {soi} to JOI. And why can't places be
 interconnected in lojban predicates?
References: <16cab846-3f84-4bc6-b64f-56aeab08244b@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <16cab846-3f84-4bc6-b64f-56aeab08244b@googlegroups.com>
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-Original-Sender: seladwa@gmx.de
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.23 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=seladwa@gmx.de
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

Am 18.08.2012 17:20, schrieb la gleki:
> At first some examples.
>
> 1.{mi ce do simxu lo nu viska} - presumably it's "We see each other" 
> although we don't know what places of {viska} must be filled with {mi,do}.

mi jo'u do simxu lo ka ce'u ce'u viska
(also works with joi and ce)


> So in the chat it has been suggested that we could move {soi} to JOI 
> with the following result:
>
> 3.{mi soi do ze'e prami}, quite a laconic way to say "We loved each 
> other since the beginning of time".

But what is prami2?

> Even more examples:
>
> 4."France and Britain had been at war [with each other] for 100 years".

lo fraso joi lo brito pu jamsi'u ze'a lo nanca be li panono


> So don't you think that those multiple meaningful examples that are 
> supposed to be frequently realised in our speech are enough to settle 
> the issue with {soi}?

We have simxu, which is much cleaner, and you can always make -si'u- 
lujvo to shorten it, so I don't really see the point of this proposal. 
Some time ago, I proposed to allow "empty" soi, that is, allow it to be 
used without anything inside, and also to allow inifinitely many 
arguments so that both these become grammatical:

     mi do soi prami
     "I love you and you love me."
     "We love each other."

     se slabu soi mi do lo pendo be mi [se'u]
     "Me, you and my friend all know each other."

This is a sort of afterthought simxu, which I sometimes wanted to have, 
but which doesn't exist (I don't like the current soi).
All of the arguments in the soi-phrase reciprocally do [bridi], in all 
[meaningful] ways possible.
The proposal didn't get much attention back then, but I guess I can 
bring it up again.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

-- 
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.