Received: from mail-gg0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]:37151) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TIcsu-00007u-PR; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 03:06:01 -0700 Received: by ggnl2 with SMTP id l2sf5178929ggn.16 for ; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 03:05:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender: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=x3cpmBNNYvKi5Uqxu3mpEc3MfN5yIYGu9F0Ag+03LV0=; b=VfCYmMRcoOYn/2EkMW3gYD0ROVTmI+fl8b4V9A8eUPOsc/XtEA3T3yN6nRyVeX/pGS ljyrTMc+4WwVCDT3drt0J78w4Cq4n2vj8z4k+QcP+LYKjs5NB9Tgx7jh6SWcLIqImFC8 e9OtFqF3+bNvZN2aLsSW86e4YxVpZRcXmfABXsts4zojO40zaVXvyIDDAqP0vMYACsds N+Cca8LFLJHfSiL+tJut9PQFdsjHHqLp1TehfEaalBRorfg3RqBsil/rkrwN7fJyKWl+ o07MFRDpYLa41onUGkvy3BhFOicChBZhZorGo2gO4MxNG0boTz1wvRTI2ICybC0vEGfB OyrQ== Received: by 10.236.91.99 with SMTP id g63mr254405yhf.4.1349085950192; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 03:05:50 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.236.198.39 with SMTP id u27ls6030168yhn.6.gmail; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 03:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.236.175.1 with SMTP id y1mr2031123yhl.9.1349085949785; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 03:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 03:05:48 -0700 (PDT) From: la gleki To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: <23276b4b-763f-4c74-afbc-a5bebd13387b@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [lojban] {kau} vs. {ba'e} MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2377_31624843.1349085948585" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / ------=_Part_2377_31624843.1349085948585 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Monday, October 1, 2012 1:32:24 AM UTC+4, tsani wrote: > > Simply because {la djan kau} is arguably never correct, {kau} can never > "replace" {ba'e}. {kau} has a particular use, namely to mark indirect > *questions*. {kau} on anything but a question is weird, at best, and > complete nonsense, at worst. > > {ba'e} on the other hand marks emphasis. Emphasis and indirect questions > are two separate ideas. > > {.i mi djuno lo du'u xukau la djan ba'e broda} "I know whether John brodas > (and not whether he does/is some other selbri)" > {.i mi djuno lo du'u ba'e xu kau la djan ba'e broda} "I know *whether* > John brodas (and not if it pertains to some other indirect question)" > > The thing about {makau} is that it's somewhat referentless, like {da}, and > it's best to think about {[question]-kau} constructs as being single items > of the [question]'s selma'o. > > As for "replacing kau with ba'e", I must say that replacing *incorrect* > usage of {kau}, such as {la djan kau}, with {ba'e}, in the form of {ba'e la > djan} is a very excellent solution. > So is it something that needs to be fixed in this chapter of the CLL? > > .i mi'e la tsani mu'o > > On 30 September 2012 04:48, la gleki >wrote: > >> It was previously mentioned that >> {.i ko'a broda xu = .i xu ko'a ba'e broda} >> >> The example >> >> http://dag.github.com/cll/11/8/ >> >> 8.4) mi djuno le du'u >> la djan. kau pu >> klama le zarci >> I know the predication-of/fact-that >> John [indirect question] [past] >> going to the store. >> I know who went to the store, namely John. >> I know that it was John who went to the store. >> >> >> is rather interesting. >> It shows the shift of focus to {la djan.} >> >> Then why not use {kau} instead of {ba'e} all the time? >> {mi kau djuno le du'u la djan. kau pu klama lo zarci} ? >> If you need arrange foci by their strength you can always say >> >> {mi kausai djuno le du'u la djan. kau pu klama lo zarci}. >> >> So my question is: >> in what cases {ba'e} is irreplaceable? >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "lojban" group. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/1sRlldvrIIEJ. >> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> lojban+un...@googlegroups.com . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/osUwGItXf7UJ. 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. ------=_Part_2377_31624843.1349085948585 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Monday, October 1, 2012 1:32:24 AM UTC+4, tsani wrote:Simply because {la djan kau} is arguably= never correct, {kau} can never "replace" {ba'e}. {kau} has a particular us= e, namely to mark indirect *questions*. {kau} on anything but a question is= weird, at best, and complete nonsense, at worst.

{ba'e} on the other hand marks emphasis. Emphasis and indire= ct questions are two separate ideas. 

{.i mi = djuno lo du'u xukau la djan ba'e broda} "I know whether John brodas (and no= t whether he does/is some other selbri)"
{.i mi djuno lo du'u ba'e xu kau la djan ba'e broda} "I know *whether*= John brodas (and not if it pertains to some other indirect question)"

The thing about {makau} is that it's somewhat referent= less, like {da}, and it's best to think about {[question]-kau} constructs a= s being single items of the [question]'s selma'o.

As for "replacing kau with ba'e", I must say that repla= cing *incorrect* usage of {kau}, such as {la djan kau}, with {ba'e}, in the= form of {ba'e la djan} is a very excellent solution.

So is it something that needs to be fixed in this chapter = of the CLL? 

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

On 30 September 2012 04:48, la gleki <g= leki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:
It was previously mentioned that <= /div>
{.i ko'a broda xu =3D .i xu ko'a ba'e broda}

The example

http://dag.github.com/cll/11/8/

8.4)   mi djuno le du'u
        &nb= sp;    la djan. kau pu
        &nbs= p;        klama le zarci
     =  I know the predication-of/fact-that
      &= nbsp;      John [indirect question] [past]
                 going to= the store.
       I know who went to the sto= re, namely John.
       I know that it was Jo= hn who went to the store.

is rather i= nteresting.
It shows the shift of focus to {la djan.}

The= n why not use {kau} instead of {ba'e} all the time?
{mi kau djuno= le du'u la djan. kau pu klama lo zarci} ?
If you need arrange fo= ci by their strength you can always say

{mi kausai djuno le du'u la djan. kau pu klama lo zarci= }.

So my question is:
in what cases {ba'= e} is irreplaceable?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com= /d/msg/lojban/-/1sRlldvrIIEJ.
=20 To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googl= egroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/= lojban?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/os= UwGItXf7UJ.
=20 To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
------=_Part_2377_31624843.1349085948585--