From sentto-44114-16339-1033585307-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Wed Oct 02 12:05:46 2002 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 02 Oct 2002 12:05:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n10.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.65]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 17wooZ-0005fu-00 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2002 12:05:43 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-16339-1033585307-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.199] by n10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000 X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 77094 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d02.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.34) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 19:01:46 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.122.1825ae68 (4320) for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:01:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e@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: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:01:34 EDT Subject: [lojban] Re: tu'a zo tordu .e zo cmalu Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary" X-archive-position: 1827 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_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/2/2002 9:58:11 AM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes: << > I don't see how cmalu is more/less comparative/measured. They both > have an x3 place. But the one-dimension distinction works fine for > me. >> I was reading off the gismu chart, which has {cmalu} as "compared to standard/norm x3," where {tordu} has "by measurement standard x3." I think these two notions are intertranslatable -- if different at all . So, yes, the dimensionality is probably the main thing. << > Why {tu'a}? Why not? >> {tu'a} presupposes and environment where an abstraction clause s likely to occur and replaces that abstraction by a sumti from within. What is the abstaction generating environment here. This is just curiosity, by the way; not complaint. xorxes << tordu: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i jarki: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i cinla: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i clani: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i ganra: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i rotsu: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i >> Thanks. I would tend to say {pamoi ralju} but am open to arguments on that -- different underlying idions, I suspect (and mine probably English and not Lojbanically defensible). And I would use {cimoi} rather than {romoi} just because I don't want to prejudge issues of possible dimensionality (I can see someone young being small in the temporal dimension, for example). --part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/2/2002 9:58:11 AM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:

<<
I don't see how cmalu is more/less comparative/measured.  They both
have an x3 place.  But the one-dimension distinction works fine for
me.

>>
I was reading off the gismu chart, which has {cmalu} as "compared to standard/norm x3," where {tordu} has "by measurement standard x3."  I think these two notions are intertranslatable -- if different at all .  So, yes, the dimensionality is probably the main thing.

<<
> Why {tu'a}?

Why not?
>>
{tu'a} presupposes and environment where an abstraction clause s likely to occur and replaces that abstraction by a sumti from within.  What is the abstaction generating environment here.  This is just curiosity, by the way; not complaint.

xorxes
<<
tordu: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
jarki: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
cinla: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i

clani: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
ganra: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
rotsu: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
>>
Thanks.  I would tend to say {pamoi ralju} but am open to arguments on that  -- different underlying idions, I suspect (and mine probably English and not Lojbanically defensible).
And I would use {cimoi} rather than {romoi} just because I don't want to prejudge issues of possible dimensionality (I can see someone young being small in the temporal dimension, for example).
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary--