Received: from mail-ve0-f183.google.com ([209.85.128.183]:62767) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1WBvxw-00084S-Eu for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:23 -0800 Received: by mail-ve0-f183.google.com with SMTP id cz12sf1000502veb.10 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from: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; bh=lkaDi/Mdrt9Jy14kitSc0vDoMMIAfzRaukGU3EM6z+Q=; b=IERkNIeA2vzm5uAK6+9KfTk0ZZNdFkChThftyqKWgg/592ru7a6sRjEzGQj4JdhPJY CxDYoucE24Kg7qaKZ/zhxdHHe1LyvwAGWlHdt/QuSAaUCU5EUTtnz2wmY/bZtLi9aIVN QW1KE7D2uv6kuPQ0oKvVsC+Sm9sCZWiV8+x8vVt+C0eQIimvmYelebsRrCi0zYs1onkz zKFWHOQZGeXwwy2KeuWpYSGzVMou4zNirquRtnyTPYhzNa1pFMYms6NHlPoMt/950Aoi 2si5owxBSs2np4oa9IWB3NwrF3EGmipqXJiCDT3TAwKRBY1pPoDjZskOXaUm5BhgsAUt slZw== X-Received: by 10.50.29.41 with SMTP id g9mr61604igh.4.1391820009891; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.111.49 with SMTP id if17ls915952igb.39.canary; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.50.67.8 with SMTP id j8mr1199485igt.7.1391820009550; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ve0-x233.google.com (mail-ve0-x233.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c01::233]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c1si1563435vdv.0.2014.02.07.16.40.09 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c01::233; Received: by mail-ve0-f179.google.com with SMTP id jx11so3362154veb.38 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.211.130 with SMTP id nc2mr12406721vec.7.1391820009407; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.8.195 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 22:40:09 -0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] [oz] {ny poi cy ke'a falcru} From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::233 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bea3a4e408c5b04f1da592b X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --047d7bea3a4e408c5b04f1da592b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis < felipeg.assis@gmail.com> wrote: > > Consider {lo spesi'u poi crino}. My interpretation is that it refers to > people that form a couple (or couples), and additionaly we have the > information that these people are green, which presumably is important to > understand which couple we're talking about. It has the same possible > referents as {lo crino poi spesi'u} and {zo'e poi spesi'u gi'e crino}. Th= e > relative clause can only limit the possible referents of the description, > not expand it. > > To talk about a green part of some spesi'u, we could say {lo me lo spesi'= u > me'u poi crino}, or more simply {lo crino pagbu be lo spesi'u}, or, in > particular, {lo speni poi crino}. > Or perhaps "lo spesi'u ku poi crino". It has always been said that "lo broda poi brode [ku]" is different from "lo broda ku poi brode". "ko'a poi brode" has to be the latter, since the restriction applies to an already complete sumti. > But, using the convention from the text, we would read it another way. {l= o > spesi'u} would still, of course, refer to a couple, but then the relative > clause would act on the reference of {lo spesi'u} to extract a part of it > that is green, even if it does not form a couple any more. The relative > clause can, then, create new possibilities of reference. It is still > restrictive in the sense that it takes a reference and then restricts it = to > a part of it. > That's how "poi" works with quantifiers after all. "ci ko'a poi broda" quantifies over the referents of ko'a restricted to those that satisfy broda. Only now could I come up with this last interpretation. It surely wasn't > intuitive to me. I will reflect on its consequences. But for now, what do > you think? > But is there any other interpretation even available for "ko'a poi broda"? mu'o mi'e xorxes --=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. --047d7bea3a4e408c5b04f1da592b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis <f= elipeg.assis@gmail.com> wrote:
=

Consider {lo spesi'u poi crino}. My= interpretation is that it refers to people that form a couple (or couples)= , and additionaly we have the information that these people are green, whic= h presumably is important to understand which couple we're talking abou= t. It has the same possible referents as {lo crino poi spesi'u} and {zo= 'e poi spesi'u gi'e crino}. The relative clause can only limit = the possible referents of the description, not expand it.

To talk about a green part of some spesi'u, we could say= {lo me lo spesi'u me'u poi crino}, or more simply {lo crino pagbu = be lo spesi'u}, or, in particular, {lo speni poi crino}.

Or perhaps "lo spes= i'u ku poi crino". It has always been said that "lo broda poi= brode [ku]" is different from "lo broda ku poi brode".

"ko'a poi brode" has to be the latter, si= nce the restriction applies to an already complete sumti.
=A0
But, using the convention from the text, we would read it another way. {lo= spesi'u} would still, of course, refer to a couple, but then the relat= ive clause would act on the reference of {lo spesi'u} to extract a part= of it that is green, even if it does not form a couple any more. The relat= ive clause can, then, create new possibilities of reference. It is still re= strictive in the sense that it takes a reference and then restricts it to a= part of it.

That's how &qu= ot;poi" works with quantifiers after all. "ci ko'a poi broda&= quot; quantifies over the referents of ko'a restricted to those that sa= tisfy broda.=A0

Only now could I come up w= ith this last interpretation. It surely wasn't intuitive to me. I will = reflect on its consequences. But for now, what do you think?

But is there any o= ther interpretation even available for "ko'a poi broda"?=A0

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
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.
--047d7bea3a4e408c5b04f1da592b--