Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tNUoU-0000ZUC; Thu, 7 Dec 95 03:07 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4790120F ; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 2:07:52 +0100 Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 20:05:54 -0500 Reply-To: Jorge Llambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: TECH: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE X4: Forethought bridi and bridi-tail connection X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 688 Lines: 19 la lojbab cusku di'e > I will pass on agreeing or disagreeing whether there is no semantic > distinction between a bridi-tail and a sentence; for onr thing, I am not > sure what you mean by the statement. I mean that a bridi-tail is a sentence in all but name. > The same sentence written with foreterms > and a bridi-tail vs. only tail-terms does have a semantic difference - > that of "observative" form. What is the semantic difference between {ta blanu} and {blanu fa ta}? I don't see any special semantic content in the "observative" form. At most it is a matter of emphasis, but that also exists in sentences with foreterms, like {ko'a ko'e broda} vs {ko'a broda ko'e}. Jorge