Received: from mail-ee0-f57.google.com ([74.125.83.57]:39477) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XnZb8-0000DC-A0 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:39 -0800 Received: by mail-ee0-f57.google.com with SMTP id d17sf721691eek.22 for ; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:27 -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=2L2NrvbAJbxe09E4/3pafefUnSEz45V0a5qmtO9XcNE=; b=xDctMqn/KrzruG7tVkqPTyGa6NNyj3xG5oJL9rTJWA9oS43toAnzdiXrV869LuMvC+ 3nSmBQu9rLlUyD3+gVO9Ovvc1HuevE+Q5QUSJnA3li4cDok666UtN7/o6nOZfQxz8UYq 2GLht6dc+sgXYAh6S6cHOX9pM0GcCzo58vt6FZK2/c+n04w/KAMPRCwart3AjMyi9zwN VPPVyfk4XNsuCm0ZJ5mxlsolxSSDHduKmrxqLZxcg5iNQPM1wJBlE62X5s0kvpUuflKN Eqd0HpJ3zDsZnwJ6V1qnbz0XEj7zNGEhu+4TuhHoAwMXEhHrjBbwYVDUaiTjJJVBbeEJ yijg== X-Received: by 10.180.85.231 with SMTP id k7mr97187wiz.0.1415566827501; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:27 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.106.100 with SMTP id gt4ls851840wib.5.canary; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:26 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.90.234 with SMTP id bz10mr3192654wib.0.1415566826952; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wg0-x233.google.com (mail-wg0-x233.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c00::233]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ed6si455546wib.3.2014.11.09.13.00.26 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:26 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::233; Received: by mail-wg0-f51.google.com with SMTP id l18so7639945wgh.10 for ; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.187.77 with SMTP id fq13mr37827522wjc.14.1415566826834; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:00:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.217.105.201 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Nov 2014 13:00:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20141028022945.GA6097@gonzales> <20141030013306.GO4023@gonzales> <20141104010958.GA27496@gonzales> <20141105035457.GA7768@gonzales> <20141108171532.GB10866@gonzales> Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 18:00:26 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= 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 2a00:1450:400c:c00::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: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bb03afadeb05a0507735515 X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - --047d7bb03afadeb05a0507735515 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: > > 2014-11-09 19:52 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : >> >> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Gleki Arxokuna < >> gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Why not then say that >>> {mi nelci la betis semau la mark} can mean "I like Betty more than Mark= " >>> where it in fact should have only one meaning "I like Betty more than M= ark >>> does." ? >>> >> >> Why is the version without "ne" equivalent to "mi ne semau la mark cu >> nelci la betis"? Shouldn't it be equivalent to "la mark cu se zmadu lo n= u >> mi nelci la betis", whatever that may mean? >> > > Than what would zmadu3 mean there? > I have no idea, I don't think it makes much sense. We have: (1) mi nelci la betis se mau la mark (2) mi ne se mau la mark cu nelci la betis (3) mi nelci la betis ne se mau la mark You say (1) can only mean something like (2), but the usual interpretation of sumti tcita is that they relate their sumti to the whole bridi in which they appear as a term, not to the x1 of that bridi. That gives "la mark cu se zmadu lo nu mi nelci la betis", which doesn't make much sense. Alternatively, something that would make sense would be "la mark cu se zmadu fi lo ka nelci", but that still leaves us with two options: "la mark cu se zmadu mi lo ka ce'u nelci la betis" or "la mark cu se zmadu la betis lo ka mi nelci ce'u". Both seem to be available as interpretations for (1). 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/d/optout. --047d7bb03afadeb05a0507735515 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.n= ame@gmail.com> wrote:
2014-11-09 19:52 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjllambias@g= mail.com>:
On Sun, Nov 9, 201= 4 at 1:14 PM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com><= /span> wrote:

Why not the= n say that
{mi nelci la betis semau la mark} can mean "I lik= e Betty more than Mark" where it in fact should have only one meaning = "I like Betty more than Mark does." ?

Why is the version without "ne&quo= t; equivalent to "mi ne semau la mark cu nelci la betis"? Shouldn= 't it be equivalent to "la mark cu se zmadu lo nu mi nelci la beti= s", whatever that may mean?=C2=A0
=

Than what would zmadu3 mean there?

I have no idea, I don't= think it makes much sense. We have:

(1) mi nelci = la betis se mau la mark
(2) mi ne se mau la mark cu nelci la beti= s
(3) mi nelci la betis ne se mau la mark

You say (1) can only mean something like (2), but the usual interpretatio= n of sumti tcita is that they relate their sumti to the whole bridi in whic= h they appear as a term, not to the x1 of that bridi. That gives "la m= ark cu se zmadu lo nu mi nelci la betis", which doesn't make much = sense. Alternatively, something that would make sense would be "la mar= k cu se zmadu fi lo ka nelci", but that still leaves us with two optio= ns: "la mark cu se zmadu mi lo ka ce'u nelci la betis" or &qu= ot;la mark cu se zmadu la betis lo ka mi nelci ce'u". Both seem to= be available as interpretations for (1).

mu'o= mi'e xorxes
=C2=A0

--
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+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--047d7bb03afadeb05a0507735515--