Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::234 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::234;
Message-ID: <544D68A0.8000402@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 22:33:20 +0100
From: Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2
References: <20141015005542.GC3713@gonzales> <CAO7tK2cb-99yDWVYNN-yxCCXZsw=3t7O-aNbtd7rrhb5uTKq3w@mail.gmail.com> <20141018004531.GE20049@gonzales> <CAO7tK2c8JQsr+7zbrdos-9Wm1t8w+sH1SANSO6e_MGV4ZDjcow@mail.gmail.com> <20141018180946.GF20049@gonzales> <CAO7tK2dUSzYCWm+CNeNugkeU=aO6mWXSY3gn5dc+8XNU3GpasQ@mail.gmail.com> <20141018233648.GA29040@gonzales> <CAO7tK2eUqpe3AwAY-DxmONhxM3Pj5kyhTm605bAnD3iJEHVgug@mail.gmail.com> <20141021010639.GB11705@gonzales> <CAO7tK2c+ObFDqF_TZTQMjGJRZfZxpoY-pFB4_canWM3Lpdgvsw@mail.gmail.com> <20141022002214.GD25753@gonzales>
In-Reply-To: <20141022002214.GD25753@gonzales>
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
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -


On 22/10/2014 02:22, Martin Bays wrote:
> } {fi'o} is maybe a little too vague for your purpose; I'd suggest {broda
> } xoi <http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/xoi> ke'a ca'e du fo'a} which
> } would be semantically equivalent to {lo du'u broda ku ca'e du fo'a}, if
> } I'm not mistaken.
>
> Is {broda xoi xo'i [tag] ke'a} not equivalent to {[tag] broda}?
Not really. {fi'o broda xy} has a rather vague semantic, it's not clear 
how the bridi is related to the fact/event of "xy broda". Often the 
bridi goes in some abstraction place of the fi'o-predicate (like with 
{ca}, {ki'u}...), but that's not always the case: {ka'a} is based on 
{fi'o klama}, and {klama} has no abstraction sumti place where the main 
bridi could go. Arguably the bridi could go into klama2 or klama3, but 
that doesn't seem to be the intended meaning when using {ka'a}.
I'd interpret {broda se ka'a xy} as {broda xoi fasnu fa ke'a jo'u lo nu 
xy se klama} ~= {fasnu fa lo nu broda jo'u lo nu xy se klama}, or 
something like this.

Therefore I wouldn't say that {broda se ka'a do} = {broda xoi ke'a klama 
do}, which means "it's brodaing, which is coming to you" (that's 
probably not the intended meaning).

However I think {fi'o xo'i TAG} = {TAG}, by definition. {xo'i}'s purpose 
is to allow using directly the predicates that are underlying sumtcita 
whose associated predicate hasn't any Lojban predicate word (e.g. 
{pu'i}, {nu'o}, {za'o} and the like).
However I'm not fond of {xo'i}, I'd rather prefer the missing sumtcita 
predicates to be given a real predicate word and be done with it. :)

mu'o mi'e la .ilmen.

-- 
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/d/optout.