From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Jun 03 09:09:00 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:09:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MBt1P-0004qo-Ps for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:09:00 -0700 Received: from mail-qy0-f180.google.com ([209.85.221.180]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MBt1J-0004qS-OV for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:08:59 -0700 Received: by qyk10 with SMTP id 10so105363qyk.28 for ; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:08:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=d08/q8p+rw4dsRGVwS4WvD1L8lmP5e7lTXLEsBqzyaM=; b=dO1KHjde9GoCzvOkMD3FpqziM6jf5XKgAWqjVeOGCaeG4Ypj61Bgeji4QJzSoL9+x8 JtmcANSM0KcxhYT1Vvjg60W7NkXM35zGtxQiFdBAfTetcFTRKfpjOoIIBx1SQtNfvjhS MHvZ3rEhuxASIC70QRfELsR0t+lp+FhQQdy2E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=vN8Es7Y+z/waiYxAeyJRffz/lTlGNTjlzfPH8lfy4pBRC17KNkUQMk1UeIZmT6/p5A XmsTY+rvgOd0su5mbYILdEs1sk3cu+7fqPwBhNf7Q6KDjoIb06EYvJ9PRTUrInWbb7VA IcZSona5WN7pbzaG+CpS8O9e3yVoquFNV39e0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.151.137.10 with SMTP id p10mr1400994ybn.214.1244045327600; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:08:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5715b9300906030827j2c8a5423m66a7d86064e7aed9@mail.gmail.com> References: <96f789a60905250431y7a22bcf5qb549c8ed730e94c8@mail.gmail.com> <425e4ac20906021752s2a4833a9nc1a41ffe6544fb06@mail.gmail.com> <5715b9300906022150p7b2409afqe2ecfc5fc7bc9cce@mail.gmail.com> <96f789a60906030813j289d35a0ofde4c560e634d16a@mail.gmail.com> <5715b9300906030827j2c8a5423m66a7d86064e7aed9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 12:08:47 -0400 Message-ID: <96f789a60906030908t278757d2q754b64acbc4ef709@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: vlapir From: Michael Turniansky To: lojban-list@lojban.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-archive-position: 15642 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mturniansky@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Luke Bergen wrote: > Interesting.  I once saw someone correcting my un-grammatical post by saying > "... di'u cu malgerna..." and was trying to mirror that.  Is "... di'u cu > malgerna..." not quite right in the same way that "di'u cu xamgu gerna" > isn't? > > Yes and no. "malgerna" suffers from a confluence of issues. One, the hot debate over exactly how one uses "mal-", and it's meaning. The second, from the fact that lujvo aren't the same as tanru, in that lujvo may be assigned meanings that are at base totally arbritrary, albeit well-defined, relations between the terms of the underlying tanru, and can drop certain things like "ke" and "se" (and even gismu) under certain cases. The third, traditional use. So, yeah, "malgerna" usually used in that way (point 3) to mean a bad example of grammar, but form a strictly technical standpoint (#1-#2), it should have probably never been formed that way. But in any case, when you use a tanru instead of a lujvo, you are under stricter controls as to meaning of it. Point #3 also explains while "malgerna" is used, instead of the more "proper" (lower-scoring) lujvo "malge'a" (malgerna) which held true even before the great rafsi reallocation of '93 (In any case, if you really wanted to to use the opposite of "malgerna", it would be zange'a) --gejyspa 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.