From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Mar 21 19:05:16 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 21 Mar 2006 19:05:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FLtea-0004rA-Sq for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 19:04:57 -0800 Received: from smtp.mail.umich.edu ([141.211.93.160] helo=skycaptain.mr.itd.umich.edu) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FLteY-0004r2-OO for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 19:04:56 -0800 Received: FROM centipede.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (centipede.gpcc.itd.umich.edu [141.211.2.212]) BY skycaptain.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 4420BED4.3FD.571 ; 21 Mar 2006 22:04:52 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 22:04:51 -0500 (EST) From: Alex Joseph Martini X-X-Sender: alexjm@centipede.gpcc.itd.umich.edu To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: sumti with relative clause In-Reply-To: <12d58c160603210622q624bba2cvc2acdb3cd9e7a6b1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20060321170502.R49527@mail.sksys.net> <12d58c160603210622q624bba2cvc2acdb3cd9e7a6b1@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-745679870-1961089865-1142996691=:14104" X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. X-archive-position: 11204 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: alexjm@umich.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list ---745679870-1961089865-1142996691=:14104 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Adam COOPER wrote: >> On 3/21/06, Cyril Slobin wrote: >> >> coi rodo >> >> Playing jboselkei, I was to comment the translation containing {ro >> nae'bo la djil noi zutse}. I am in doubt whether {noi zutse} applies >> only to {la djil} (as author of translation assumes) or to the whole >> sumti {ro na'ebo la djil} (as I guess)? Jbofi'e output is opaque. >> >> Which version is correct? >=20 >=20 > jboski says >=20 > [1(2*ro* *every* *(of)* (3*na'e* *not* *bo* * * (4(5*la* * * *djil.* > *[NAME] *)5 <6*noi* *,which..,* [7=C2=AB8*zutse* *sit-ing*=C2=BB8]7>6)4)3= )2]1 >=20 > So {noi zutse} modifies only {la djil} >=20 > mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan Official (DOS) parser agrees: { <[na'e bo] [(la djil) (noi {zutse VAU} KU'O)] LU'U>} VAU so --> [(la djil) (noi {zutse VAU} KU'O)] mu'omi'e .aleks. ---745679870-1961089865-1142996691=:14104-- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.