Return-Path: Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rIZgW-00007DC; Fri, 16 Dec 94 12:14 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 MAA21662 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 1994 12:14:47 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (MAILER@SEARN) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-7 #2494) id <01HKPHIW6YPS000DNK@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Fri, 16 Dec 1994 10:13:48 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0207; Fri, 16 Dec 1994 11:11:34 +0100 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 05:12:15 -0500 From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: some help needed Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: Logical Language Group Message-id: <01HKPHIW7CUA000DNK@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-To: topic@math.hr X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1688 Lines: 45 >What is the difference (except in brevity, of course; I'm not talking about >that now) between > >da, as defined by {da poi du'u broda}, and > >ko'a, as defined by {lo goi ko'a du'u broda} > >co'o mi'e. goran. Well, your second sentence is ungrammatical. ko'a is a specific pronoun with a definite referent. In theory it should always be used only after defining it, at which point you could replace "ko'a" by the string it is equivalenced to, and get a correct understanding. The two ways to assign ko'a are to make a predication in which all other relevant sumti are specified, and ko'a fills one place. This is usually done with the poredicate "du". But in a sentence like "ko'a klama le zarci" a later reference to ko'a would be quivalent to "le klama be le zarci". (This usage is not significantly covered in any text description unless Cowan does so in one of his papers, but the draft textbook did use "ko'a du ..." without explaining it. The other way is to express a sumti and specifically assign it to ko'a for later reference, using goi. goi is symmetrical, so the following are equivalent: la djan goi ko'a cu klama le zarci ko'a goi la djan cu klama le zarci Thereafter ko'a means "la djan". But goi requires a valid sumti-form on each side, so your example with only "lo" on the left is ungrammatical. If you mean "ko'a goi lo du'u broda" then I think the answer depends on the current discussion. If "lo is short for a implicit "DA poi" construct, then you are asking whether there is a difference between da poi du'u broda and ko'a goi da poi du'u broda which is clearly the same (unless I screwed up with terminators somehow, which I doubt). lojbab