From MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Sat Oct 30 07:21:37 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 30 Oct 2004 07:21:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imo-m25.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.6]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CNu6h-00066C-FY for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 07:21:28 -0700 Received: from MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com by imo-m25.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id d.1ec.2c83c66f (4196) for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:20:52 -0400 (EDT) From: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Message-ID: <1ec.2c83c66f.2eb4fd44@wmconnect.com> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:20:52 EDT Subject: [lojban] ko ko kurji To: lojban-list@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1ec.2c83c66f.2eb4fd44_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 12 X-archive-position: 8887 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_1ec.2c83c66f.2eb4fd44_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2004-10-30 5:24:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes: > > > I have always thought that the "ko" construct is a bit of a kludge. What > > > especially bugged me was the example in CLL "ko ko kurji". Why replace > > > both "do" with "ko"? > > > > Because it lets you express two meanings simultaneously: > > > > "Take care of yourself" > > "Be taken care of by yourself" > > > My impression is that it was attempt to be clever without saying so. Replacing either 'do' with 'ko' would have been sufficient for the translation. stevo --part1_1ec.2c83c66f.2eb4fd44_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 2004-10-30 5:24:49=20= AM Eastern Daylight Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes:


> > I have always tho= ught that the "ko" construct is a bit of a kludge. What
> > especially bugged me was the example in CLL "ko ko kurji". Why= replace
> > both "do" with "ko"?
>=20
> Because it lets you express two meanings simultaneously:
>=20
>     "Take care of yourself"
>     "Be taken care of by yourself"
>=20


My impression is that it was attempt to be clever without saying so. &nb= sp;Replacing either 'do' with 'ko' would have been sufficient for the transl= ation.  

stevo --part1_1ec.2c83c66f.2eb4fd44_boundary--