From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Nov 13 18:05:28 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:05:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Gjnfg-0006mo-SZ for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:05:09 -0800 Received: from eastrmmtao03.cox.net ([68.230.240.36]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GjnfZ-0006mO-6r for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:05:08 -0800 Received: from eastrmimpo01.cox.net ([68.1.16.119]) by eastrmmtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061114020504.CQXI13537.eastrmmtao03.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:05:04 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([72.192.234.183]) by eastrmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id mS4H1V00l3y5FKc0000000; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:04:19 -0500 Message-ID: <45592449.7090103@lojban.org> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:04:57 -0500 From: Bob LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: "la" rule References: <20061113204805.48815.qmail@web81309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4558E466.80006@lojban.org> <525A773F-A307-43AF-9603-3E18C02C42FA@mac.com> <20061113222348.GL24729@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <54928D3C-975A-48ED-BBCB-2FEE8811049C@mac.com> <20061114004132.GR24729@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20061114004524.GS24729@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20061114005211.GU24729@chain.digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 13143 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Robert McIvor wrote: > > On 13 Nov, 2006, at 20:06, Robert McIvor wrote: > > I believe I remember that 'coi' identifies the author of something. In > Loglan the > canonical form would correspond to Coi La Bab, where Bab is the name. > However, a sort of usage sprung up which used the equivalent of Coi Bab, > if Bab himself was the author and Coi la Bab if one were citing a third > party. > The equivalent of 'coi is not a name marker in Loglan, so the 'la' > would be > considered the marker to be stripped Lojban's vocative marker is "doi", having no semantic content other than implicit in the grammatical marking. "coi" means "hello" and has the same grammar as the vocative marker, but the obvious semantics and pragmatics of greeting. Lojban has several other members of the vocative selma'o/lexeme. lojbab 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.