From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri May 12 20:35:22 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 12 May 2006 20:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1FekuF-0003vI-6Q for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 12 May 2006 20:35:03 -0700 Received: from mxsf42.cluster1.charter.net ([209.225.28.174]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1FekuD-0003ux-0u for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 12 May 2006 20:35:03 -0700 Received: from mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net (mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net [209.225.28.140]) by mxsf42.cluster1.charter.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k4D3YxLH012632 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 23:34:59 -0400 Received: from 24-247-28-251.dhcp.bycy.mi.charter.com (HELO [192.168.123.137]) ([24.247.28.251]) by mxip10a.cluster1.charter.net with ESMTP; 12 May 2006 23:34:59 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.05,123,1146456000"; d="scan'208"; a="311359362:sNHT31130136" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v749.3) In-Reply-To: References: <925d17560605120641y12e1cfb7ydb80fad3d465bb1a@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560605121557l1341cd6dn57fab88b8c956e80@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560605121704y72a68ee6u9cd709c3cc8b1409@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560605121743p2fec3c21o6296fb8db5fdb87e@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560605121850q38d49a3qaae649a9f6012e2b@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <31B16AD5-6DCF-4083-9CC1-495AD2409B6D@umich.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Alex Martini Subject: [lojban] Re: Usage of lo and le Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 23:34:59 -0400 To: lojban-list@lojban.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.749.3) X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 11532 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 [ li'o ] > Consider: I've been talking to a zookeeper about 20 certain bears for > the past hour, and in fact, I'm in the middle of a sentence regarding > them just as we get to a somewhat filthy cage/habitat, in which I see > 2 of those 20 bears. I say "take all the bears in the cage to the > infirmary for a checkup, right now". The zookeeper takes the two bears > out of the cage, and begins shutting the door. I stop him, and say > "take ALL the bears in the cage to the infirmary for a checkup". Is > the difference in meaning, and the utility of that difference > apparent? I hope that it is. This is the difference between position 1 > and 2, and it's essential in, to give one example, contractual > writing. But really, it's useful anywhere that you want to explicitly > state what you mean, without having the listener guess based on > context (without having context get in the way of clear > communication). > [ li'o ] Now you've got me confused -- what other bears do you include in "ALL the bears in the cage"? You clearly don't mean all 20 that you were talking about, those would be "all the bears in *the cages*". Yes, the plural distinction isn't made in Lojban, but English does distinguish so this matters here. Do you refer to {all the bears who are in this cage, and those who were in this cage}? mu'omi'e .aleks. 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.