Received: from mail-ve0-f183.google.com ([209.85.128.183]:49909) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1W7OtJ-0001XW-Pr for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 04:33:01 -0800 Received: by mail-ve0-f183.google.com with SMTP id cz12sf1055152veb.20 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 04:32:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=d9/WfGtg6hXI4vIX10NvjyOSpl7AHKIRPG8/nuihf0Q=; b=TxFh/cUqBPOOUkcI3OAi39SSVWkzRa0K0cFRp3sVJhndgxrubXEhJRMKHeZeIGJ8v9 6aEx5WBRX6Xzkhu7uAVPFBnxsS+FxKiv4gfwqs4+kgNIOIH81ib9PJ4keS5j8ofZ/m/o jm0Io0+tnaxQTrK2yM9KhODAi5kUpK9IxV/K72ddKu4OPAqxj0Z6EP/0eNEdZZiNOoKS vnj8/OJNx1W2rUq12k/Nkogh7VXLKPDAXCmo9K/eZxGnD3md3KFrLHuXkw6otRRyetWR HS8i0OhULt8zeTvcGk2Ro1JQtC9oqQjoqlMRcCyrPSyYPtLk+okKJdrKC2kYg0Ok72iW r93g== X-Received: by 10.50.50.8 with SMTP id y8mr126901ign.13.1390739559299; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 04:32:39 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.111.80 with SMTP id ig16ls1617111igb.39.canary; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 04:32:38 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.50.112.10 with SMTP id im10mr7366622igb.1.1390739558625; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 04:32:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net. [212.227.15.19]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id sq4si1193456pbc.0.2014.01.26.04.32.38 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Jan 2014 04:32:38 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.15.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.15.19; Received: from [192.168.2.108] ([93.220.105.137]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LtlG5-1V6fwn3TQz-011Drh for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:32:36 +0100 Message-ID: <52E50068.7030804@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:32:40 +0100 From: selpa'i User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] [oz] {ka'e} vs. {su'o mu'ei} References: In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:g6TpDnGdqHjFVVsgnXGq6C3NZqpl4gPVMFx8rmgBbxk93ZkujX7 jc6AlgCpFy644XyZmN0PlNY6wYQywSgJQw/08L8CdlcuhncAdwzBdoDaYQDEDvFal3LuU5z tH19Yhc+r/88EoQJjZKnyLWpnqsjHcWSGq0+7bHw8Dm359XurwDJPZuozXxJr5RnRRq8O08 l6/hD3olcejIkRC5x7Ukg== X-Original-Sender: seladwa@gmx.de X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.15.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=seladwa@gmx.de 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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / la .asiz. cu cusku di'e > You use {mu'ei} exactly once in the whole translation: > {no da po'u na'e bo lo tolv=C4=97rnu be mu'u mi cu su'o mu'ei p=C4=8Dn= si lo nu > b=C4=81tci lo tai cm=C4=81lu} (lion speaking) > > Is it purely stylistic (more syllables can be more emphatic, or it may > be the lion's style), or do you by any chance make a distinction between > {ka'e} and {su'o mu'ei}, or between {bi'ai} and {ro mu'ei}? I know that {su'o mu'ei} and {ka'e} are suppposed to be the same, but I=20 think I do see a difference in emphasis. In this case the difference is=20 between "nobody would ever" and "nobody can", sort of. For me: ka'e X broda =3D=3D lo nu broda cu cumki X So it's a much simpler statement than "there exists at least one=20 possible world where broda happens" even if they are truth funtionally=20 the same. Replacing {su'o mu'ei} with {ka'e} in the Oz sentence makes it sound=20 different to me for some reason. It probably shouldn't. Or maybe they=20 *aren't* equivalent. I'm not sure. All I know is that I don't seem to=20 use them interchangeably myself. mi'e la selpa'i mu'o --=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.