From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri May 05 09:53:09 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 05 May 2006 09:53:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fc3Xv-0003xx-Jy for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:52:51 -0700 Received: from web50210.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.38.51]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fc3Xu-0003xq-JK for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:52:51 -0700 Received: (qmail 28092 invoked by uid 60001); 5 May 2006 16:52:48 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=aEH2+OL3UyxRRB1VX3TXlSceoQD5VCYFbfuLLiPXXF0l1mVSWgP4N6ARXjczPE5WlLfUcvYSOKuTRuUNlXqmrVk7x9+k/3KziPMY1D5XnR9AeqngeMUZteNmRfO7/cLBllZmbw9qakec9jv5OqW48ZAxBuPdSxFvYVb3MJKngAk= ; Message-ID: <20060505165248.28090.qmail@web50210.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.81.181.173] by web50210.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:52:48 PDT Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 09:52:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Ed Blake Subject: [lojban] Re: Usage of lo and le To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) X-archive-position: 11392 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: kitsune_e@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --- Maxim Katcharov wrote: > ... > > {lo cribe cu citka lo jbari} - bear eat berry > {lo'e cribe cu citka lo jbari} - bears eat berries (the typical bear > eats berries) > {le cribe cu citka lo jbari} - a bear ate berries (or maybe I think > that bears will come and eat berries, whatever) > > ...yes? Confusing. > .u'i As a novice I would like to get into this conversation and muddy the waters a bit! In my understanding the difference between lo cribe and le cribe is that when I say "lo cribe cu citka lo jbari" I mean Actual bears eat Actual berries - while when I say "le cribe cu citka le jbari" I mean "there is some thing I'm calling a bear (which may or may not be vaguely resemble a bear) is eating something I'm calling 'berries' (regardless of whether they are really apples or papaya or people)". lo == the thing which (apparently) really is X le == the thing I'm calling X (which is not required to be a real X) So the usefulness of le is that you can describe things by their characteristics/behavior or any word you want to apply to them. While with lo you mean what you (exactly) say - no metaphor, no simile, no puns, etc. So is that it, or am I totaly decieved? 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.