Received-SPF: none (google.com: lojbab@lojban.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=68.230.241.213;
Message-ID: <5410C170.9050007@lojban.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 17:24:00 -0400
From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" <lojbab@lojban.org>
Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] the future of Lojban's leadership
References: <25B055499F67420FA34794323F9A95AB@gmail.com>	<540B374A.9040409@lojban.org>	<CAO7bV+gQQtt4qtnrj6LUWpj5rv5Qpkoy3GaKsg+CewG3-Mw+OA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMDmBpHS_h8ui41oZnKO4kt13KdVCodTa+crWzo3E9hyyBummg@mail.gmail.com>	<540B8D1B.8050807@gmail.com>	<540F391F.5050002@lojban.org>	<5410B0FC.3000507@lojban.org> <pYgj1o01D56Cr6M01Ygluv>
In-Reply-To: <pYgj1o01D56Cr6M01Ygluv>
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=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

On 9/10/2014 4:40 PM, Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org
> <mailto:lojbab@lojban.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 9/9/2014 4:50 PM, And Rosta wrote:
>
>
>         In old usage, "le" was standardly not used in a
>         baseline-compliant way;
>         cf how "le nu", "le ka", "le du'u" used to be default in usage.
>
>
>     That is still my default.  I don't know why it is not
>     baseline-compliant (indeed, Xorxes has told me that the old usage is
>     not incorrect under xorlo)
>
>
> I hope I didn't say that. What I probably did say is that most of the
> stuff that was correct pre-xorlo is still correct with xorlo,

I can probably find the quote, but I am not sure it is really relevant.=20
  But when someone repeatedly tells me I am wrong, I am less likely to=20
keep trying.  I am sure that I am not the only one this holds for, and I=20
am pretty sure that I would misuse xorlo, if only because I don't know=20
when NOT to use "lo".

> I believe And may be thinking of something like "mi nelci le nu limna"
> for "I like swimming". The problem with "le" here is that when you say
> "I like swimming" you don't have a particular event of swimming in mind,
> so why would you use "le"?

le is not necessarily singular (or plural), but I certainly have some=20
concept of what events of swimming (that I am fond of) are, and I am,=20
referring to one or more of such events.

  "le nu limna" is supposed to be a particular
> event of swimming that the speaker has in mind.
>
> (Nowadays many people would probably rather say "mi nelci lo ka limna",
> but the change from "nu" to "ka" is not from xorlo.)

But of course I don't know that my concept of swimming and/or its=20
properties is the same as yours.  Since I still associate "lo" with=20
veridicality, and there are likely some events of swimming that I would=20
not nelci, I would have trouble saying "lo".

lojbab


--=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/d/optout.