From jordimastrullenque@yahoo.com Mon Oct 18 03:21:40 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 18 Oct 2004 03:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web51609.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.38.214])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34)
	id 1CJUdt-0005Sl-V3
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 03:21:30 -0700
Message-ID: <20041018102055.81688.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [62.57.116.105] by web51609.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 03:20:55 PDT
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 03:20:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: jordi mas <jordimastrullenque@yahoo.com>
Subject: [lojban] Re: jordis
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: <20041018032831.GP21519@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-archive-position: 8739
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: jordimastrullenque@yahoo.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


> I actually *snarled* when I saw the "du", it's
> considered that bad stylistically.

I figured that out. Looks like a reflex.
 
> *However*, much as it bothers me by default, it *is*
> correct usage here.  

Which leaves "X1 is something Robin is not
used to see" as an alternative definition
of "X1 is correct usage but considered bad
stilistically".

>As Pierre, he had a *PARTICULAR* translator
> in mind.  What he
> was asking was not "Are you the person who
> translated Abiword?"(1), he
> was asking "I have a person in mind named jordis who
> translated
> Abiword; are you that person?"(2).

If you say (1) in that context, I understand you mean
(2). I understood he meant (2) just fine. 

> The only other way I can think of off the top of my
> head to ask the
> second question is "xu do me la jordis poi fanva la
> abiUORD.".

Looks correct. Might you please use the top of your
head again, but this time without using the word 
"la jordis", which was already understood from
context?

> As xorxes pointed out on the beginner's list, "du"
> is correct, both
> in usage and stylistically, when you are equating
> two things you
> have in mind.

Precisely my point.

--jordi



=====


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com