Return-Path: Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rKWnk-00007DC; Wed, 21 Dec 94 21:34 EET Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by kantti.helsinki.fi (8.6.9/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA24894 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:34:19 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (MAILER@SEARN) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-13 #2494) id <01HKX0JEAOE80005NN@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Wed, 21 Dec 1994 19:33:24 +0200 (EET) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0178; Wed, 21 Dec 1994 20:31:02 +0100 Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 12:29:57 -0700 From: Chris Bogart Subject: Re: ni'i vs naja Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: Chris Bogart Message-id: <01HKX0JEZ26U0005NN@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1162 Lines: 25 >> The reference grammar paper has a little table like this, but it's not >> consistent with the examples. > >Please point out the discrepancies, and they will be fixed forthwith! >(I'm sure there are some, I just haven't seen them.) Now that I've gone through it again in detail to respond to Jorge, I can't find the discrepancy again. Either you fixed it somewhere along the line, or I was confused myself. It might help to extend that "table" to something like this: ledu'u CAUSE rinka ledu'u EFFECT rinka is claimed EFFECT ri'a ledu'u CAUSE EFFECT is claimed CAUSE seri'a ledu'u EFFECT CAUSE is claimed EFFECT .iri'abo CAUSE all 3 are claimed ri'agi CAUSE gi EFFECT ??all 3 are claimed?? and put this in with the section on modals, as well as with the comparison between tenses and modals. (But that's just my learning style -- I really like charts and tables -- so take it with a grain of salt.) ____ Chris Bogart \ / ftp://ftp.csn.org/cbogart/html/homepage.html Quetzal Consulting \/ cbogart@quetzal.com