From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Dec 18 11:17:21 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:17:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1J4hwN-0007Zc-QZ for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:17:20 -0800 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.153]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1J4hwI-0007Z3-6u for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:17:19 -0800 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e12so397778fga.0 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:17:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=krGqNsOk87gVyKLzBWxqbKelvG4n3MYzTeQOBgfwLnI=; b=SPEFK1luZ/yFqI74ELqg2Qr5v3Qsug//SBHUdsL1GnFU2ApwLpJNufKcZ3971A4cb3BNS7EtsB0weNMNUCC/jxx6EbQAPo/bqurtaPSfnxi3sojng1W3NYydQ4ETQZdlPJqw3dvMiu9rLhIvHEgaUblHoEU598RXNGZv4IpyN9w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=G30LMi9wksvGtkJ6JutqYnZKKGuzs7TttEcl2irQJy+yXrGQhwmAWCRDJknASyJU5wJUuH73fUWP0NwZEl0PwgS01I+8BKUkrcqKICgJMbcyBQRibmG72GdTWJsJGcVPjhyHaO6qCZc7TaqR8x/SdOfA9WQhlNncwiJdP0B/gwo= Received: by 10.86.89.4 with SMTP id m4mr8025776fgb.12.1198005432204; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:17:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.86.13 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:17:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d17560712181117k3d8ee116yab87e6e27d6d6361@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:17:12 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: is a gismu a selbri? In-Reply-To: <737b61f30712181039r134bca55v908d10e8be1323be@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <737b61f30712181039r134bca55v908d10e8be1323be@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 14031 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Dec 18, 2007 3:39 PM, Chris Capel wrote: > LFB says in chapter 2 part 1 > > "A selbri is not a type of word (like a 'verb' in English); it is > something that some types of words can do." > > Is this correct? Does it even make sense? Yes. A selbri is a construct, which may consist of one or more words. Examples of selbri are: {klama}, {sutra klama}, {pu klama}, {ci moi}, {me la .djan.}, {nu mi klama le zarci}, etc. > By this interpretation, a > gismu would not *be* a selbri, but only able to act as one. Correct. > Yet I > believe that for any type of word that can act as a selbri, each word > of that type can act as a selbri, so there's really no reason not to > say that a gismu *is* a selbri. Or have I gone wrong here? A gismu, like all brivla, can, all by itself, be the selbri of a given bridi, yes. > I think perhaps the author was just trying to provide some concepts to > preempt confusion over Lojban vs. English parts of speech, but thereby > ends up being slightly inaccurate. "selbri" is not a part of speech, unless one considers "noun phrase" for example a part of speech. "gismu" is also not a part of speech in the usual sense. The parts of speech in Lojban would be BRIVLA, CMEVLA, A, BAI, ..., ZOhU. mu'o mi'e xorxes 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.