Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rHyxr-00007DC; Wed, 14 Dec 94 21:02 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 VAA17119 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 21:02:12 +0200 Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI (MAILER@FINHUTC) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-7 #2494) id <01HKN7D2TTHC0008BA@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 19:01:13 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4439; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 21:02:23 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4741; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 19:59:00 +0100 Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 14:01:49 -0500 (EST) From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: Lojban prescriptivism? Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Message-id: <01HKN7D3F6120008BA@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 709 Lines: 24 la lojbab cusku di'e > > mi na djuno le du'u makau se cmene <> > > > > > >My sentence has the same number of syllables, and is more clear because > >it doesn't need a {tu'a}. > > > >What would you expand yours to, if you had to make the tu'a explicit? > > Probably the same as yours. But you can't, because you had {lekau se cmene} as a sumti. Unless {tu'a } doesn't mean {le du'u co'e}. > When I think x2 of djuno, I instinctively go > tu'a sumti whereas you go ledu'u bridi. Perhaps because in Spanish I am forced to use a bridi with "saber", which is the verb I associate with {djuno}, while English "to know" can mean either "saber" or "conocer". Jorge