Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:40:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: la arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <a2f60970-a0d8-40cd-808a-51f0c547ce9e@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ8VDVAT-aDV4zm6+rWFwxU+qqjS=EXb9v=oDv9fmd1TChmXw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3729f7bd-3aa6-499c-9a20-4b3d040d3ad8@googlegroups.com>
 <CA+gZtg+Z5G30sNjBiOtOxFwE5Js=4uwM3T9Sd2MftKHxjoG88Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOQ8VDVOxKYbUoRCPDoLPpMxxWFobVQ=j0wStj=JDobXzwYS_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <b22c720e-ccb3-43af-ad2c-0db522e5844a@googlegroups.com> <CAOQ8VDWvOUw7r2RFOhuLmF0cssAE5LEUUKJ1QtJOUBsKzroi9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <fe420003-35a6-45b3-a9cd-e2c428b979ea@googlegroups.com> <CAKOEKkQtSd+TpVhgbx4tWQCrmfOfOUMRkxS=j_rpeLcv0WSOxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOQ8VDXC4BtasPubD2sgGwJmvUhoq=WVL1iqYVkkA1Mjy=EsVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <6035ac71-4afd-48f6-9223-49cc81b983d9@googlegroups.com> <CAOQ8VDXWrLwD9ZsULhUSzAWMs5vm6SVZUCjwfpdaaA9Z9YYVHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <274032a8-a7d3-4ef6-9ef3-ede559362a19@googlegroups.com>
 <CAOQ8VDVAT-aDV4zm6+rWFwxU+qqjS=EXb9v=oDv9fmd1TChmXw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] A bug in the CLL 7.6 example 6.14).
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_98_6968454.1372052402753"
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_98_6968454.1372052402753
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1


On Sunday, June 23, 2013 11:07:30 PM UTC+4, tsani wrote:
>
> On 23 June 2013 14:29, la arxokuna <gleki.is...@gmail.com <javascript:>>wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, June 23, 2013 9:50:14 PM UTC+4, tsani wrote:
>>
>>> If we are to create a bridi relative clause (like e.g. {so'o'oi} in 
>>>> selmaho SEI) it should also incorporates such "comments" as {so'o'oi mi 
>>>> xusra se'u}.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Do you mean that the bridi relative clause should also be copied over, 
>>> if we were to allocate a SEI for bridi relative clauses? I don't really 
>>> understand what you're saying here.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not proposing anything. I'm just asking. Should bridi relative clause 
>> be copied or not?
>>
>
> I don't *think* that they should be copied, but until we have collected 
> usage of bridi relative clauses, I can't really make up my mind. 
> (Constructing artificial examples isn't the best way to go about this.)
>
> If we allow them to be copied, they how do we go about overwriting them? 
> This same question applies to sumtcita as well, however, so I'm not sure.
>

Wait, aren't sumtcita copied under the *current* grammar?
 

>  
>
>> Oh, and what about {to ... toi} ? They are also not copied, right? Or 
>> they are copied but {to'i ... toi} is not copied?
>>
>>
> I definitely think that to...toi should *not* be copied. There's no point 
> in restating the contents of the parenthetical remark.
>
> e.g. A: .i lo mi mamta (to ri carmi co jai fanza mi caze'aca vau ta'o toi) 
> cu jdice lo du'u vo'a mi dunda be lo rupnu be li reno jdini
> B: ua .i go'i ra'o zo'e ne ku'i li cimu
> "A: My mother (she's really been annoying me these days) decided to give 
> me twenty dollars.
> B: Ah, mine too (give me money, that is), but thirty-five dollars."
>
> In this case, the to...toi is conveniently not copied, because B doesn't 
> want to state that B's mother has been annoying him/her these days. If B 
> did want to state that, they they could easily add {to lo me mi moi cu 
> simsa vau .oi}. If copying were default, then it would become necessary to 
> explicitly negate the copied parenthetical remark.
>  
> .i mi'e la tsani mu'o
>

-- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


------=_Part_98_6968454.1372052402753
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Sunday, June 23, 2013 11:07:30 PM UTC+4, tsani wrote:<blockquote=
 class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr">On 23 June 2013 14:29, l=
a arxokuna <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" =
gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"NUXTxVZ6JcUJ">gleki.is...@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span>=
 wrote:<br><div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">

<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Sunday, June 23, 2013 9:50:14 PM UTC+4, t=
sani wrote:<br><div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;mar=
gin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail=
_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:=
1ex"><div>If we are to create a bridi relative clause (like e.g. {so'o'oi} =
in selmaho SEI) it should also incorporates such "comments" as {so'o'oi mi =
xusra se'u}.</div>


<div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Do you mean that the bridi =
relative clause should also be copied over, if we were to allocate a SEI fo=
r bridi relative clauses? I don't really understand what you're saying here=
.</div>

</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>I'm not proposing =
anything. I'm just asking. Should bridi relative clause be copied or not?</=
div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I don't *think* that they should be co=
pied, but until we have collected usage of bridi relative clauses, I can't =
really make up my mind. (Constructing artificial examples isn't the best wa=
y to go about this.)</div>

<div><br></div><div>If we allow them to be copied, they how do we go about =
overwriting them? This same question applies to sumtcita as well, however, =
so I'm not sure.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Wa=
it, aren't sumtcita copied under the *current* grammar?</div><div>&nbsp;</d=
iv><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;=
border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>&nbsp;</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div>Oh, and what about {to ... toi} ? They are also not copied, right? Or =
they are copied but {to'i ... toi} is not copied?</div><div><div><br></div>=
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I definitely think that to...toi sho=
uld *not* be copied. There's no point in restating the contents of the pare=
nthetical remark.</div>

<div><br></div><div>e.g. A: .i lo mi mamta (to ri carmi co jai fanza mi caz=
e'aca vau ta'o toi) cu jdice lo du'u vo'a mi dunda be lo rupnu be li reno j=
dini</div><div>B: ua .i go'i ra'o zo'e ne ku'i li cimu</div>

<div>"A: My mother (she's really been annoying me these days) decided to gi=
ve me twenty dollars.</div><div>B: Ah, mine too (give me money, that is), b=
ut thirty-five dollars."</div><div><br></div><div>In this case, the to...to=
i is conveniently not copied, because B doesn't want to state that B's moth=
er has been annoying him/her these days. If B did want to state that, they =
they could easily add {to lo me mi moi cu simsa vau .oi}. If copying were d=
efault, then it would become necessary to explicitly negate the copied pare=
nthetical remark.</div>

<div>&nbsp;</div><div>.i mi'e la tsani mu'o</div></div></div></div>
</blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_98_6968454.1372052402753--