Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of betsemes@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.172 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.172;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1370523739.81533.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <CAHxnAmJvBZ1_4S1OF45n3dd5g2iQmFEGiQbsyBTN6PwybsNkrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A379EF.3020803@gmx.de>
	<CAHxnAm+HZGvy=Ck9nvogsR_uHL=+BYPho6vDKe8WGp-H4xKmEA@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A6685C.3010505@lojban.org>
	<CAMKwHj3gpou-t-6wPOLP7TCXdGhVGU2z+H-z4g=yGJK8Yg2gEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A8680E.7040103@lojban.org>
	<CAMKwHj3+aWwW0E3QP271aRNP8oKMy9hNDipjypX6hhJkauM+_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A8F326.2020901@lojban.org>
	<51A8F89D.2040408@gmx.de>
	<51B00097.8080004@lojban.org>
	<51B06D24.6020102@gmx.de>
	<1370523739.81533.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 07:38:59 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHxnAm+h-j6-W4Sr_3LfWQ8+pydOMrEnOXmSyCTVRusSg9yhJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] cmevla as a class of brivla
From: Betsemes <betsemes@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:02 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Given my earlier remarks, I think my position has to be that {la .tsani.}
> has as much to do with the sky as "Smith" has to do with a forge, always
> allowing that a particular user may want to insist on more (as in the {la
> cribe} case often cited).  That is, {la .selpa'i.} is purely denotative and
> whatever semantics (or grammar, for that matter) {selpa'i} may have are
> simply not relevant.  Note, this does not make {selpa'i} a name when it
> stands alone, only when it is properly marked off, so as to be clearly
> distinct from the predicate {selpa'i}.

xorlo definition of {la}:
la (LA)
Name article. It converts a selbri, selecting its first argument, or
any string of cmevla into a sumti. The resulting expression refers
specifically to an individual or individuals that the speaker has in
mind and which the speaker names with the selbri or cmevla. An inner
quantifier can be used (in the case of a selbri) as part of the name.
An outer quantifier can be used to quantify distributively over those
individuals.

That's not terribly clear. On one hand it says that {la} selects the
first argument, which to me means the first argument is the name and
not the selbri itself. On the other hand it says that the selbri
itself is the name ("...the speaker names with the selbri..."). Since
this last idea makes better sense, to me at least, I'll have to side
with John Clifford's position as well.

mu'o mi'e betsemes

-- 
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.