Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.22 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.17.22;
Message-ID: <52F22313.3010600@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 12:40:03 +0100
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo
References: <CAN2DD_E0QBcidfV+rp=N+rW1YeYtOanugo172BbgwFmswA2-SA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAO7tK2cTUxZvNpLPZk2+PwKeKm1FeAOrszb0KrO2iOkuL5yNYw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAN2DD_Gz9d2v9LRw1_bEmGtXU8_QOQTWo2Tk3REUsSS6QMw53g@mail.gmail.com>	<CALMa68pamR_-TRJhW8mEBNmkpPHAMmL46VKJrCcS-taXJpz2Ug@mail.gmail.com>	<CAO7tK2d7fogaSxRUT-_CLf0L-NZSYMYCHJ4EJvW7kJYVGyCOrQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CALMa68ruyYHETWwb_VJnnH7swZH1TZW9KNSME5h29wcbSjBKvQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAO7tK2eN58CSQB6HZxtMBYU9JakYENshfnqZDS+idkFrONRamw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2eN58CSQB6HZxtMBYU9JakYENshfnqZDS+idkFrONRamw@mail.gmail.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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

la .xorxes. cu cusku di'e
>        {lo si'o mitre cu ckilu lo ka ma kau ni ce'u clani}
>
> I never really understood the connection of "si'o" with scales.

Me neither. I don't understand how it makes sense, as it's very 
difficult to interact with a {si'o} systematically. I use {ka} instead, 
sometimes with two {ce'u}, although I find the {ce'u ma kau} way just as 
intuitive, for example in klani3:

     lo vi rokci cu klani li mu lo ka ce'u ki'ogra ce'u/ma kau

which means the same as

     lo vi rokci cu ki'ogra li mu

How to use {klani} with predicates that don't have an obvious 
input-output pair is another question. Here, {kau} seems to be more 
convenient as the output marker than a second {ce'u}, say:

     mi klani li ci lo ka ce'u citka xo kau plise
     "I measure three in how many apples I ate."

Probably the more difficult challenge is to find a situation where klani 
is actually the more practical (or the only practical) option. Maybe {ni}:

     li vo ni mi bajysru lo foldi [kei lo ka ce'u xo kau roi fasnu]
     "Four is the quantity of my running around the the field, [measured 
in how many times it happened]"

But then, that's still only a complicated way of saying:

     mi vo roi bajysru lo foldi

So... the challenge stands.

Though maybe the advantage lies in the vagueness of klani3-less 
{klani}-usage. I'm really not sure.

mi'e la selpa'i 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.