Message-Id: <199404151914.AA04537@nfs1.digex.net> Reply-To: Matthew Faupel Date: Fri Apr 15 15:14:17 1994 Sender: Lojban list From: Matthew Faupel Subject: Re: Once again... X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Bob LeChevalier In-Reply-To: message from Jorge Llambias on Thu, 14 Apr 1994 12:31:07 EDT Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Fri Apr 15 15:14:17 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU I've been away on a training course all week, so I've only just seen the flurry of messages about "one more time". JC: Furthemore, "su'ipa" doesn't mean what Colin seems to think: it's just JC: the forethought form (+ 1), i.e. 1. To say "one more", we need JC: something like "pa su'i no'o", one plus the typical value in this JC: context. Is addition meaningful with only one argument? Surely the addition operator requires at least two operands and so if you provide only one, the listener will (in good Lojban tradition) fill in the missing operand with the obvious value. In this context, the obvious value could well be the (possibly indeterminate) number of times the actor has done the action before. This is a moot point though in that, as has been pointed out, MEX expressions can't be used with MOI or ROI without the rather clumsy {meli ... me'u} bracketing. I had more really brilliant insights to give, however on writing them down they seems far less brilliant than I first thought :-( I think I'll go home, have a relaxing weekend, and then try again on Monday :-) Cheers, Matthew