From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Fri Dec 16 17:21:35 1994 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by nfs2.digex.net with SMTP id AA00800 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 16 Dec 1994 17:21:30 -0500 Message-Id: <199412162221.AA00800@nfs2.digex.net> Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9408; Fri, 16 Dec 94 17:21:16 EST Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8292; Fri, 16 Dec 1994 15:06:10 -0500 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 19:57:25 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: SE & FA To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu In-Reply-To: (Your message of Fri, 16 Dec 94 04:46:12 EST.) <199412160946.AA25031@access3.digex.net> Status: RO > >I am I right in these translations? > > se mamta fa mi "I am a mother" > > selmamta fa mi "I have a mother" > > > >--- > >And > > No. "fa" manipulation is conseidered totally metalinguistic. You MUST > physically rearrange the pieces to know what is meant. I think this > even overrides scope issues, though I am not sure we addressed the issue. > (Thus "broda de fa roda" would mean the same as "roda broda de"). I don't > feel real strooong on scope interaction and "FA" if you-all who like to > use it want scope to be spoken order dependent. I am more concerned with > SE conversion. I was very much hoping the answer to my question would be Yes. What I am specifically wondering about is whether "fa" accesses x1 of the selbri without SE, or with SE. Bob Chassell's reply on this question says fa picks up the x1 after Se conversion (i.e. the ur-x2 in my example). ---- And