From MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Fri Jul 25 16:38:36 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 25 Jul 2003 16:38:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com ([64.12.136.7]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19gC8l-0001At-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2003 16:38:23 -0700 Received: from MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v36_r1.1.) id d.157.2210b00c (16781) for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:37:48 -0400 (EDT) From: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Message-ID: <157.2210b00c.2c53194b@wmconnect.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:37:47 EDT Subject: [lojban] "they" To: lojban-list@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_157.2210b00c.2c53194b_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 12 X-archive-position: 5983 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --part1_157.2210b00c.2c53194b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2003-07-24 5:21:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes: > > Who went? "They" is anaphora, it's only meaningful in English when we've > > already been talking about some group. > "they" is ambiguous in english. it's often anaphoric, referring to people/things already spoken of, but it can also be deictic, referring to people/things who are neither speaker nor addressee, but not referred to before. ex: (pointing at some group of people) "who are they?" btw, "ledu" seems weird to me. stevo stevo --part1_157.2210b00c.2c53194b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 2003-07-24 5:21:13 AM Eastern= Daylight Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes:


> Who went?  "They"= is anaphora, it's only meaningful in English when we've
> already been talking about some group.

"they" is ambiguous in english.  it's often anaph= oric, referring to people/things already spoken of, but it can also be deict= ic, referring to people/things who are neither speaker nor addressee, but no= t referred to before.  ex:  (pointing at some group of people) "wh= o are they?"

btw, "ledu" seems weird to me.
stevo

stevo --part1_157.2210b00c.2c53194b_boundary--