Received: from mail-ee0-f56.google.com ([74.125.83.56]:37647) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UJmqy-0002q6-6V; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 08:29:17 -0700 Received: by mail-ee0-f56.google.com with SMTP id b47sf2020937eek.11 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 08:28:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received: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=rMRq1OwH/GRvZLEpZq5lcE2H+BLcH3rNLiXmjQWLByU=; b=Qd62xE4X48aGXmVHzQuds1soPr6s1AyVscs/l//8KwUNTFsP62a5x6rgBElVEB9duv lNvryCvUGC2AJGymniQW/hm7CDDU0HD9iyF7Z7Qdmsvya9JsxYqCVU5YsIj/iCDtGJ3o VzC/rM2qlq28Kvy2KrjQ0mIl+sQi2txhftsHu0iWHRfyQV367Wz3awbkT0VLvZgwgv9l 1SnbUEF1iGx0RX/eWNHXgxo1HpZ2r1ijUWRTFBrEy8591oVbVIHlCtFlV9l5aRBiJgC3 zbE9cNuy5iGY6tAYTRHnW753taYy7zZNyrFc3lHvCQIYCNKO4wxlGUrSxj98oy1e5SQb hfug== X-Received: by 10.180.212.69 with SMTP id ni5mr698250wic.6.1364138932518; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 08:28:52 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.93.65 with SMTP id cs1ls1713812wib.15.gmail; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 08:28:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.15.33.2 with SMTP id b2mr4299060eev.7.1364138931815; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 08:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net. [212.227.15.19]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 6si2074761eej.0.2013.03.24.08.28.51; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 08:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.15.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.15.19; Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.12]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0M8LTo-1UfQET2QlO-00vvfd for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:28:51 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 24 Mar 2013 15:28:51 -0000 Received: from p54AF4A96.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.2.100]) [84.175.74.150] by mail.gmx.net (mp012) with SMTP; 24 Mar 2013 16:28:51 +0100 X-Authenticated: #54293076 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+x+hQJbjGxQq8NSh+LMIIhTM2ga5+6TWsuDQ6ycZ LAxIVDmEFwKrPO Message-ID: <514F1BB9.2070007@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:28:57 +0100 From: selpa'i User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] what {me lo broda ku} means and why not allow {selbri NOI} References: <514F1132.8020502@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <514F1132.8020502@gmx.de> 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 212.227.15.19 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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / la selpa'i cu cusku di'e > Are you saying that {noi} and {poi} would have different uses as > selbri/bridi relative clauses? I can see {poi} being a substitute for > {gi'e}, and {noi} a bridi relative clause, but maybe there are uses for > a {noi}-like gi'e or a restrictive bridi relative clause. This is how I understand it: For {poi}: ko'a broda poi ke'a brode == ko'a broda gi'e brode For {noi} I can see two possibilites: (a) ko'a broda noi zo'e no'a == ko'a broda .i zo'e go'i (b) ko'a broda noi brode ke'a == brode lo su'u ko'a broda I think (b) is more useful and clearer. (There is another option, and that is to make up that ke'a-GOhA. Then, both (3.1) and (3.2) can be expressed with it. Downside: new cmavo.) Here are examples of each use: (1) mi dansu poi lo nu do ke'a viska cu na se djica ke'a "I dance and don't want you to see me." (2) mi do prami noi do mi na no'a "I love you, which you do not reciprocate." "I love you and you do not love me." (3.1) mi dansu noi ke'a mi pluka "I dance, which is enjoyable to me." (3.2) mi dansu noi do se xajmi ke'a "I dance, which you find funny." Sentence (1) shows how {poi} lets us avoid jai+fai with complex bridi-tails: mi dansu poi lo nu do ke'a viska cu na se djica ke'a == mi dansu gi'e na jai se djica fai lo ka do ce'u viska This is one of its two main advantages. The other is that making {broda NOI brode} legal is taking a currently ungrammatical construct that people often intuitively use and making it grammatical. Sentences (3.1) and (3.2) show {ke'a} representing the event (or predication) of the containing bridi. In both, {ke'a} == {lo nu mi dansu}. The possible downsides to all this I already mentioned in my previous post. mu'o mi'e la selpa'i -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.