From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Mon May 31 08:36:03 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 31 May 2004 08:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web41903.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.154]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BUopQ-0005JN-OK for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 31 May 2004 08:35:56 -0700 Message-ID: <20040531153526.69684.qmail@web41903.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web41903.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 May 2004 08:35:26 PDT Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 08:35:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Jorge "Llambías" Subject: [lojban] Re: Learning Lojban To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <200405310910.01587.phma@phma.hn.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 8021 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --- Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Monday 31 May 2004 08:45, Jorge "Llambías" wrote: > > Sounds right. I think the best way to think of {lo} is as > > a selbri-to-sumti converter, without any additional baggage. > > To someone who doesn't know Lojban, "selbri" and "sumti" are semantic zeros. > The closest terms in English, I think, are "verb phrase" and "noun phrase", > and it's important to note that a bare noun cannot be used as a noun phrase > in Lojban, whereas it can in English, French, and most other languages I > know. Yes. All I meant to say was that if we saw {lo} as a simple syntactic converter instead of trying to assign to it some additional meaning then perhaps there wouldn't be so much debate about it. Or perhaps there would still be. mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/