From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:59:07 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 20332 invoked from network); 21 Nov 1996 18:30:38 -0000 Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 21 Nov 1996 18:30:38 -0000 Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <1.ED3A3CAD@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Thu, 21 Nov 1996 19:30:33 +0100 Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 11:29:12 -0700 Reply-To: Chris A Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris A Bogart Subject: Re: place switching cmavo... To: lojban%cuvmb.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu In-Reply-To: <199611211642.JAA09579@indra.com> Content-Length: 830 Lines: 24 Message-ID: <5ZPR4l8jQJK.A.9DC.760kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org> On Tue, 19 Nov 1996, R.M. Uittenbogaard wrote: > I always thought the places were numbered subsequently, and > > fo le dargu cu klama fa mi do lemi zdani le karce > > meant that "le karce" occupies the x4 place as well, which makes > it equal in meaning to: > > mi klama do lemi zdani le dargu .e le karce , or > mi klama do lemi zdani le dargu fo le karce > > So instead, filled places are skipped for subsequent sumti? I think you're right and Lojbab is mistaken on this one, but I don't have my references here at work to look it up. I seem to remember a discussion on this where someone suggested that (to use your example) le karce and le dargu would act like appositives, supposedly naming the same thing (and I forget the cmavo which would do this directly: po'u? no'u? something like that maybe...) co'o mi'e kris