Received: from mail-ie0-f188.google.com ([209.85.223.188]:39620) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UoOph-0004z7-M6 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:36 -0700 Received: by mail-ie0-f188.google.com with SMTP id qd12sf843623ieb.5 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:x-yahoo-newman-property:x-yahoo-newman-id:x-ymail-osg :x-rocket-mimeinfo:x-mailer:references:message-id:date:from:reply-to :subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=WaPkBLBl3FTK5LRZOM/Tfe37Fds0lNg3iJGILejOIY8=; b=pTmJNNi5QeJunOPT1vmnjv95OC68mmT9gBLdU+NJ2QNNLDdESGXsuK/n6RB8zAXui5 InJjlHfarB1eHNSohxh7ZwEh+UjpHpr2C62CW97E6NEtFe4U1JBYD0iZ3x7NL1DZdZKZ plSk+0dWGX07ShpYg8AsjPQDlH/mfnlSU7JmkXAC4LK6wtkRTwdvw9lBrzB+sSm/EAr/ 0G9nCHVOWVkFaVm/JSpdUqbjqtZdZj+DvygspoyudtqMBpBL7/AsusL1QOFJPYuVK/Yg rtRRyZaWdWB1Gc0eP2t6XPTay7HoUJC6kyoKGxRWDbgr3KFzsrIbBCwPdLG/wEuLPqER PEwg== X-Received: by 10.50.3.74 with SMTP id a10mr323064iga.2.1371434763588; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:03 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.20.98 with SMTP id m2ls719511ige.21.gmail; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.47.115 with SMTP id c19mr8546401ign.2.1371434762989; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm13-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm13-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com. [66.94.236.13]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i6si1368481igv.2.2013.06.16.19.06.02 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:02 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.13 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.236.13; Received: from [66.94.237.199] by nm13.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Jun 2013 02:06:02 -0000 Received: from [66.94.237.110] by tm10.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Jun 2013 02:06:02 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1015.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Jun 2013 02:06:02 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 357991.44839.bm@omp1015.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 25798 invoked by uid 60001); 17 Jun 2013 02:06:01 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: sDRPplUVM1k8VjkVjT0_Z1LCN_9HT_IJjuNHlbLIffoZbCb iLqW27TRUylhwpwV0mEGu68NOt5Z5qcD4HK5P0gTH0rwhP8uOQzA.tUyIy.E 4DcQSfp_5Jjw1K_dV0QF1DZo1UibkrmPEvjARqdRV3Z.Dun5P6UpvIOMrhWO 7iYqJ3dLf4ar6lu.BG3WuvopR3w_fhBO9nm1Kfdtu5uah0h81Qe.igQ31EGp ._GyE9V_yDqyseJXkwdUFNHRWlJy12ZC3iDnyVp3TJ0D4QHdqvDy_XGk7sGT JLyExdyYV_R5Z4itJEx287zfsm11bAM2gpdTIb3SYqyDB6n.VIuDVN4kQJki _fNZZqGlA.jxI7Ws.0JZ3mqEEXYBxegM26ix5a5V2gcPruXO37PvC_S8iNv3 grUsVlRXu7G0gde._jusFSvGFOXjmxYNkmd2hX47HsyjDyCnf5BzftCFaCDu X3AsBMyz25kiGYcV4PX.i2dyCY_JSF_r8XZtUiKkPLiKmKTWrvvgu1nceBJH 6Zw8Ap1XcDs2coarnBe6xz8BRENYUuXXjZK1klld3TI5fKFX3NgrSS8I7mJt qW.hhuUanzDktT3gG2BwVC2BN8VXBRyI5NDZM3.mMkze63K1HrTTUUjJ9b8g WlqYYRogGgLBC1_r78isesQMYY2amBKIZag_t_SW54rYR2b5lR3Pa7jirvbs Mbgvb3ZqUAWgphIiUs6NVfZ1TZaK5hox2QinPwfs- Received: from [99.92.108.194] by web184405.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:01 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001,SSdtIHN0aWxsIGZpbmRpbmcgdGhpcyBjb25mdXNpbmcsIHByb2JhYmx5IHBhcnRseSBmcm9tIExvamJhbiB0ZXJtaW5vbG9neS4gbWknbyBpcyBhcHBhcmVudGx5IHRoZSB1bmlvbiBvZiBtaSBhbmQgZG8sIHdyaXR0ZW4ge21pIGpvJ2UgZG99PyzCoCB3aXRob3V0IGNvbW1lbnQgYWJvdXQgaG93IHRoZXkgaW50ZXJhY3Qgd2l0aCBwcm9wZXJ0aWVzLsKgIFRvIHNheSwge3JvIG1pJ299dGhlbiBzYXlzIHRoYXQgdGhleSBpbnRlcmFjdCBkaXN0cmlidXRpdmVseSBhbmQgY29tcGxldGVseSBhbmQgdGh1cyBhbW8BMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.146.552 References: <8561d566-8f8b-4b46-9e7b-5fdbc1367b33@googlegroups.com> <51BDBA1D.80602@gmx.de> <51BE419F.4090806@gmx.de> Message-ID: <1371434761.19218.YahooMailNeo@web184405.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:06:01 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] "we" and masses. A bug in the CLL? To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" In-Reply-To: <51BE419F.4090806@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.236.13 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass header.i=@yahoo.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="-1412092350-908433826-1371434761=:19218" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / ---1412092350-908433826-1371434761=:19218 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm still finding this confusing, probably partly from Lojban terminology. = mi'o is apparently the union of mi and do, written {mi jo'e do}?,=A0 withou= t comment about how they interact with properties.=A0 To say, {ro mi'o}then= says that they interact distributively and completely and thus amount to {= ro mi e ro do}, as noted.=A0 Of course, other quantifiers would not break d= own so easily {su'o mi'o} is surely {su'o mi a su'o do} but nothing else wo= rks (well, {no ... e...}). I don't get the point about {mio}, largely becau= se I don't quite see what it is supposed to be (it isn't given anywhere and= doesn't appear to be Lojban). ________________________________ From: selpa'i To: lojban@googlegroups.com=20 Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 5:52 PM Subject: Re: [lojban] "we" and masses. A bug in the CLL? =20 la latro'a cu cusku di'e > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 9:14 AM, selpa'i > wrote: >=20 >=A0 =A0 ro mi'o =3D mi .e do >=20 > While I agree with this suggestion (as we already discussed on IRC), I > disagree with this equation. Instead ro mi'o =3D ro mi .e ro do. Good point. I made the same point with the "mio" translation, but just went= with singular {mi} and {do} here. {ro mi .e ro do} is obviously better. mu'o mi'e la selpa'i -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --=20 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 e= mail 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. ---1412092350-908433826-1371434761=:19218 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm still finding this c= onfusing, probably partly from Lojban terminology. mi'o is apparently the u= nion of mi and do, written {mi jo'e do}?,  without comment about how t= hey interact with properties.  To say, {ro mi'o}then says that they in= teract distributively and completely and thus amount to {ro mi e ro do}, as= noted.  Of course, other quantifiers would not break down so easily {= su'o mi'o} is surely {su'o mi a su'o do} but nothing else works (well, {no ... = e...}). I don't get the point about {mio}, largely because I don't quite se= e what it is supposed to be (it isn't given anywhere and doesn't appear to = be Lojban).

From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
To:= lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent= : Sunday, June 16, 2013 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] "we" and masses. A bug in the CLL?

la latro'a cu cusku di'e
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 9:14 AM, selpa'i &= lt;seladwa@gmx.de
> <mailto:seladwa@gmx.de>> wrote:
>
>&nb= sp;   ro mi'o =3D mi .e do
>
> While I agree with this s= uggestion (as we already discussed on IRC), I
> disagree with this eq= uation. Instead ro mi'o =3D ro mi .e ro do.

Good point. I made the s= ame point with the "mio" translation, but just went with singular {mi} and = {do} here. {ro mi .e ro do} is obviously better.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'= i

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goo= gle Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop recei= ving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
T= o post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.go= ogle.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://grou= ps.google.com/groups/opt_out.




=

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail 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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
---1412092350-908433826-1371434761=:19218--