Received: from mail-oa0-f55.google.com ([209.85.219.55]:53441) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1VpJPd-0001En-SX for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:26 -0800 Received: by mail-oa0-f55.google.com with SMTP id l6sf530624oag.0 for ; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=am4n9t/MMOcnfgDnvyZgKHRzKaMhctYqrm3o+NlmhTQ=; b=Q8Oeee5zpmI4jBzYxCXHf9xyLcwYfmGqKPk3RHpp/iwInmFzGNI6X38bRTJ10NLpsj pTSktv5j7QzsjeCnK967Zw/Y+oWZW8F1a6EzfDuMo9w+KUDXDKL/uzKVnbKG5uOYH3Qj k7/6lG5pPL/rjcfSW49NdkMcAIyj5C0vZYeUsIu2tbYa9tz4PyEHNVKfJnjyVwdagNey DVTaK4GMJlYWA21ZyIOBQHKHwnfGul2T++tUwsVQHu8FsuLzPiCyd6ohLiOyhm6UPjDs 53eGUhqd5sgJgga1OY/j1YT00t8DkuKljauG+rA9sSBI+PxtkCOkNkpTEpqv97/ejcro hM0w== X-Received: by 10.50.20.6 with SMTP id j6mr154382ige.15.1386428595819; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:15 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.118.97 with SMTP id kl1ls912700igb.35.canary; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:15 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.66.158.6 with SMTP id wq6mr931471pab.39.1386428595457; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vc0-x233.google.com (mail-vc0-x233.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c03::233]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z8si182758qcn.0.2013.12.07.07.03.15 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:15 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c03::233; Received: by mail-vc0-f179.google.com with SMTP id ie18so1923752vcb.24 for ; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:15 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.58.210.39 with SMTP id mr7mr5776357vec.18.1386428595184; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 07:03:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.221.41.65 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Dec 2013 07:02:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <529EA55C.40800@kli.org> <20131204145028.65d8aa5f@aol.com> <20131206074058.524db1e8@aol.com> From: ".arpis." Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 10:02:54 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Alice essay To: Lojban X-Original-Sender: rpglover64@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::233 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rpglover64@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6c5d0ec560204ecf30fb5 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / --047d7bd6c5d0ec560204ecf30fb5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > (Hypocritically, I have a stylistic choice to argue about: I would have, >> instead of {lo jukpa lo cifnu cu kansa}, said {lo jukpa .e lo cifnu cu >> kansa}; in the original text, the line is "the cook and the baby joined", >> not "the cook joined the baby") >> > > But "lo jukpa .e lo cifnu cu kansa" means that each of them was doing > something with someone, not that they were doing something together. "lo > jukpa joi lo cifnu cu kansi'u" would have worked though. > > There are a some gismu like kansa, penmi, and a few others where I really > don't like it when people use a plural in x1 and leave the x2 unfilled with > the intention that it be taken as "reciprocally". > I wouldn't have taken it to be meant reciprocally; I read the English to mean that they both joined the duchess. mu'o mi'e xorxes > -- mu'o mi'e .arpis. -- 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. --047d7bd6c5d0ec560204ecf30fb5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
(Hypocritically, I have a stylistic choice = to argue about: I would have, instead of {lo jukpa lo cifnu cu kansa}, said= {lo jukpa .e lo cifnu cu kansa}; in the original text, the line is "t= he cook and the baby joined", not "the cook joined the baby"= )

But "lo= jukpa .e lo cifnu cu kansa" means that each of them was doing somethi= ng with someone, not that they were doing something together. "lo jukp= a joi lo cifnu cu kansi'u" would have worked though.

There are a some gismu like kansa, penmi, and a few oth= ers where I really don't like it when people use a plural in x1 and lea= ve the x2 unfilled with the intention that it be taken as "reciprocall= y".

I wouldn't have take= n it to be meant reciprocally; I read the English to mean that they both jo= ined the duchess.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


--
mu'o mi'e .arpis.

--
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.
--047d7bd6c5d0ec560204ecf30fb5--