Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22d as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22d;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:14:30 -0200
Message-ID: <CALMa68pAATH-Vs_S8mwH+9m31WoTCdZ-c_sGfe0GGNE05cEhRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban] [oz] {ny poi cy ke'a falcru}
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=bcaec517191140cb2104f0e10caf
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

--bcaec517191140cb2104f0e10caf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The full passage is:
  {lo n=E0rge cu tai cm=E0lu .i ja'e bo ny poi cy ke'a f=E0lcru cu ja'a ru'=
e se
zm=E0mei ny poi cy ke'a p=F9nji lo l=E0nka}

Here, {ny poi cy ke'a falcru}, clearly means something equivalent to either
{lo narge poi cy ke'a falcru} or to what I would write as {lo me ny poi cy
ke'a falcru}. To me, an anaphoric expression always has exactly the same
referent as the antecedent. What do you think?

doi la selpa'i, what is your idea behind this usage? Do you think the
anaphora just occurs at the superficial textual level, so that {ny} would
be equivalent to {lo narge}? Or do you think that {ko'a poi broda} is
meaningful in general, so that {ko'a} can in effect refer to a strict part
of ko'a, i.e, as in {lo me ko'a}?

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.

--bcaec517191140cb2104f0e10caf
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>The full passage is:<br>=A0 {lo n=E0rge cu =
tai cm=E0lu .i ja&#39;e bo ny poi cy ke&#39;a f=E0lcru cu ja&#39;a ru&#39;e=
 se zm=E0mei ny poi cy ke&#39;a p=F9nji lo l=E0nka}<br><br>Here, {ny poi cy=
 ke&#39;a falcru}, clearly means=20
something equivalent to either {lo narge poi cy ke&#39;a falcru} or to what=
 I
 would write as {lo me ny poi cy ke&#39;a falcru}. To me, an anaphoric expr=
ession always has exactly the same referent as the antecedent. What do you =
think?<br><br></div>doi la selpa&#39;i, what is your idea behind this usage=
? Do you think the anaphora just occurs at the superficial textual level, s=
o that {ny} would be equivalent to {lo narge}? Or do you think that {ko&#39=
;a poi broda} is meaningful in general, so that {ko&#39;a} can in effect re=
fer to a strict part of ko&#39;a, i.e, as in {lo me ko&#39;a}?<br>
<br></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 />

--bcaec517191140cb2104f0e10caf--