From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Oct 20 15:53:13 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1CKPKL-0008S7-LW
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:53:05 -0700
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:53:05 -0700
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: jordis
Message-ID: <20041020225305.GE32722@chain.digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org
References: <20041018233121.GA6056@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20041019100238.30717.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20041019100238.30717.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
X-archive-position: 8812
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 03:02:38AM -0700, jordi mas wrote:
> > "da" is most general, then.
> 
> OK, thanks. 
> 
> would the following work? which one is less malglico?
> 
> le da poi pinfu na me do 

Ow ow ow ow.

Ummm.

The thing which is a prisoner and is not among the things that are
you?  I guess?

Note that this is a sumti as a whole, not a sentence.  If you meant
for it to be a sentence, you want "da poi pinfu na me do", which is:

    There exists a thing which is a prisoner and is not among the
    things that are you.

I would switch to English the instant I saw somone say either of
those in IRC.

> do na me le da poi pinfu

Here the "le" is illegal; da is already a sumti.

    There exists at least one prisoner; you are not among those
    things that are that thing(s).
    
Note that for every purpose I can imagine this is exactly the same
as "do na pinfu".

> le da poi pinfu zo'u do na me

That sentence is unrecoverably non-grammatical.  Perhaps you meant:

    da poi pinfu zo'u do na me da
    
Which means exactly the same thing as the previous sentence.

I've got an idea: why don't you tell us what problem you're actually
trying to solve, and we'll tell you how to do it without causing
experienced Lojbanists to suffer headaches.  :-)

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"