Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22f;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 11:54:42 -0200
Message-ID: <CALMa68pZ3jyCGNrChnO=LFsQUx8LiyrS7M7rnMRxi-NSuxw5xw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban] [oz] {lebna} vs. {cpacu}
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Felipe_Gon=E7alves_Assis?= <felipeg.assis@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: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd7581e0d011904ef4d9a1a
X-Spam_score: 0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 1
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  coi selpa'i In several places you used {lebna} where I would
    use {cpacu}. E.g., (1) {my cu ba zi lèbna lo vo'a zbibù'u gi'e si'a co'a
   klàku} (2) {lo cmàlu ke tolcì'o nìnmu cu lèbna lo tànbo lo ra nàzbi} (3) {lèbna
    lo bàktu lo kàjna} (4) {ny lèbna lo cmàlu lànka gi'e clùgau ly lo nànba}
   (5) {la .dòrotis. cu kàrgau lo lànka gi'e lèbna pi su'o lo nànba} [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.1 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
                             (felipeg.assis[at]gmail.com)
  0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED   No valid author signature, adsp_override is
                             CUSTOM_MED
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
  0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID         DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid

--047d7bd7581e0d011904ef4d9a1a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

coi selpa'i

In several places you used {lebna} where I would use {cpacu}. E.g.,
 (1) {my cu ba zi l=E8bna lo vo'a zbib=F9'u gi'e si'a co'a kl=E0ku}
 (2) {lo cm=E0lu ke tolc=EC'o n=ECnmu cu l=E8bna lo t=E0nbo lo ra n=E0zbi}
 (3) {l=E8bna lo b=E0ktu lo k=E0jna}
 (4) {ny l=E8bna lo cm=E0lu l=E0nka gi'e cl=F9gau ly lo n=E0nba}
 (5) {la .d=F2rotis. cu k=E0rgau lo l=E0nka gi'e l=E8bna pi su'o lo n=E0nba=
}

You do use {cpacu} in other places, though. E.g.,
 (6) {lo n=ECxli cu co'a cp=E0cu kl=E0ma}
 (7) {la .d=F2rotis. cu kl=E0ma te zu'e lo nu cp=E0cu la .t=F2tos.}

Clearly you have a more general interpretation of {lebna}, particularly of
lebna3, than what is indicated in the gi'uste notes, where it is said
  "x3 is possessor and not merely source, alienation is implied"
  "cf. cpacu, where [...] previous possession is not necessarily implied"

I understand it is often useful to use gismu with more general definitions,
but in this case I am confused: How do you differentiate between {cpacu}
and {lebna}?

mu'o
mi'e .asiz.

--=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.

--047d7bd7581e0d011904ef4d9a1a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>coi selpa&#39;i<br><br>In several places you used {le=
bna} where I would use {cpacu}. E.g.,<br>=A0(1) {my cu ba zi l=E8bna lo vo&=
#39;a zbib=F9&#39;u gi&#39;e si&#39;a co&#39;a kl=E0ku}<br>=A0(2) {lo cm=E0=
lu ke tolc=EC&#39;o n=ECnmu cu l=E8bna lo t=E0nbo lo ra n=E0zbi}<br>
=A0(3) {l=E8bna lo b=E0ktu lo k=E0jna}<br>=A0(4) {ny l=E8bna lo cm=E0lu l=
=E0nka gi&#39;e cl=F9gau ly lo n=E0nba}<br>=A0(5) {la .d=F2rotis. cu k=E0rg=
au lo l=E0nka gi&#39;e l=E8bna pi su&#39;o lo n=E0nba}<br><br>You do use {c=
pacu} in other places, though. E.g.,<br>
=A0(6) {lo n=ECxli cu co&#39;a cp=E0cu kl=E0ma}<br>=A0(7) {la .d=F2rotis. c=
u kl=E0ma te zu&#39;e lo nu cp=E0cu la .t=F2tos.}<br><br>Clearly you have a=
 more general interpretation of {lebna}, particularly of lebna3, than what =
is indicated in the gi&#39;uste notes, where it is said<br>
=A0 &quot;x3 is possessor and not merely source, alienation is implied&quot=
;<br></div><div>=A0 &quot;cf. cpacu, where [...] previous possession is not=
 necessarily implied&quot;<br><br></div><div>I understand it is often usefu=
l to use gismu with more general definitions, but in this case I am confuse=
d: How do you differentiate between {cpacu} and {lebna}?<br>
<br></div><div>mu&#39;o<br>mi&#39;e .asiz.<br></div></div>

<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 />

--047d7bd7581e0d011904ef4d9a1a--