Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id WAA07344 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 1996 22:43:35 +0200 Message-Id: <199601292043.WAA07344@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4E702165 ; Mon, 29 Jan 1996 21:43:35 +0100 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 16:10:44 -0500 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Subject: Re: sentient lizards (comment on jvoplace.txt) X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199601292101.QAA07291@locke.ccil.org> from "Steven M. Belknap" at Jan 29, 96 11:42:47 am Content-Length: 1082 Lines: 36 > John's document may be between changes here: > > >Which brings us to > > > >1.3) mi lekmau do lo mitre be li pimu > > I cold-exceed you by-amount-what-is measured-in-meters-as 0.5 > > > Shouldn't this be > > mi lekmau do lo kelvo be li pimu > > (Presumably mi and do refer here to sentient lizards, or other > poikilothermic persons.) Ouch! Obviously a mixture of different versions here. 1.1 is canonical, 1.2 is almost right, and 1.3 is totally bogus. (But you don't need to be poikilothermic to differ in temperature by five kelvins: one of you is hypothermic, that's all.) > Another possibility would be to build on the > previous examples given earlier in the paper: > > le bisli ku lekmau le djacu zohe lo kelvo be li mu Actually it's "le bisli cu lekmanu le djacu le ni kelvi li mu". > Query: Why use cu, isn't it more instructive to use le...ku pairs? Using "cu" is a stylistic choice that's compatible with most of our intermediate materials. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.