Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tF8Wb-0000ZTC; Tue, 14 Nov 95 01:42 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9876293D ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 0:42:53 +0100 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 19:29:12 GMT Reply-To: ia@stryx.demon.co.uk Sender: Lojban list From: Iain Alexander Subject: Re: all the chinese whispers X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1005 Lines: 32 In message <9511121416.aa29880@punt-4.mail.demon.net> ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK writes: > Iain: > > > > > 6. Iain: > > ... > > > > > .i mi certu le nu troci lenu jai zdile lo'e prenu poi gasnu da > > > > I didn't understand the {jai} there. > > > Nor me. Baffling. > > Well, my gimste says the x1 of {zdile} is an event: > > zdile zdi amusing 'amused' > > x1 (abstract) is amusing/entertaining to x2 in property/aspect x3; > > so I was just being pedantic zo'o. > > Are you sure you mean {jai}? It ought to be followed by a sumtcita > (I think). Naked {jai} was introduced a long time ago as a sort of inverse of {tu'a}. x1 jai broda x2 x3 ... tu'a x1 broda x2 x3 ... but there's also an extra {fai} place for the original event in broda's x1. x1 jai broda x2 x3 ... fai xf xf po'u lenu x1 co'e cu broda x2 x3 ... ki'ape'i co'o mi'e .i,n. -- Iain Alexander ia@stryx.demon.co.uk I.Alexander@bra0125.wins.icl.co.uk