From sentto-44114-14596-1025827383-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Thu Jul 04 17:03:45 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 04 Jul 2002 17:03:45 z (PDT) Received: from n24.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.80]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17QGZS-0007ex-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 17:03:34 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-14596-1025827383-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.94] by n24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Jul 2002 00:03:04 -0000 X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 5 Jul 2002 00:03:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 96541 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2002 00:03:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Jul 2002 00:03:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m05.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.8) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Jul 2002 00:03:03 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.21.) id r.25.2a043357 (4405) for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 20:02:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <25.2a043357.2a563c2d@aol.com> To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 20:02:53 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] pro-sumti question Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_25.2a043357.2a563c2d_boundary" X-archive-position: 128 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: pycyn@aol.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --part1_25.2a043357.2a563c2d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/4/2002 4:37:58 PM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes: > 1. on "ri .e ra": My understanding is that "ri" would refer back to the > last sumti, which is the cat. Then, "ra" would refer back to the > next-to-last sumti - the first being "ri", which is NOT permanently > assigned, and so is available as a referent. This makes "ra" refer again > to the cat. You could instead (though I don't recommend it) use "ri .e ru" > > or "ra .e ra". > Boy, I hope you are wrong about that (my Book is not handy): {ri/a/u} was one of the cases -- I thought -- where genuine accuracy was possible in pronouns. [Jordan, note the slippery "sumti" here] <. What I'd probably do is use "gy. .e my.".> Fuzzier in theory but probably more effective here (even than {ri/a} ). Do we really need a double glottal stop (The !Qon word for "ice box" springs to mind). You always, of course, have the option (shorter than some of the alternatives proposed) of using "le gerku .e le mlatu". Was is pycyn. who once pointed out that repetition is also a form of reference (of course, when he said it, it was witty). What he said was "Repetition is also anaphora," witty mainly if you recall that "anaphora" is Greek for "repetition" -- linguistic anaphora is mainly ways to avoid the literal version. --part1_25.2a043357.2a563c2d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/4/2002 4:37:58 PM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:

1. on "ri .e ra": My understanding is that "ri" would refer back to the
last sumti, which is the cat. Then, "ra" would refer back to the
next-to-last sumti - the first being "ri", which is NOT permanently
assigned, and so is available as a referent. This makes "ra" refer again
to the cat. You could instead (though I don't recommend it) use "ri .e ru"
or "ra .e ra".

Boy, I hope you are wrong about that (my Book is not handy): {ri/a/u} was one of the cases -- I thought -- where genuine accuracy was possible in pronouns. [Jordan, note the slippery "sumti" here]

<. What I'd probably do is use "gy. .e my.".>
Fuzzier in theory but probably more effective here (even than {ri/a} ). Do we really need a double glottal stop (The !Qon word for "ice box" springs to mind).

You always, of course, have the option (shorter than some of the
alternatives proposed) of using "le gerku .e le mlatu". Was is pycyn. who
once pointed out that repetition is also a form of reference (of course,
when he said it, it was witty).

<You always, of course, have the option (shorter than some of the
alternatives proposed) of using "le gerku .e le mlatu". Was is pycyn. who
once pointed out that repetition is also a form of reference (of course,
when he said it, it was witty).>

What he said was "Repetition is also anaphora," witty mainly if you recall that "anaphora" is Greek for "repetition" -- linguistic anaphora is mainly ways to avoid the literal version.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--part1_25.2a043357.2a563c2d_boundary--