From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:59:02 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 13863 invoked from network); 13 Dec 1996 14:27:37 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 13 Dec 1996 14:27:37 -0000 Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <14.A0DFFEC2@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Fri, 13 Dec 1996 15:27:35 +0100 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 11:35:30 GMT Reply-To: Don Wiggins Sender: Lojban list From: Don Wiggins Subject: Re: A challenge To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1299 Lines: 38 Message-ID: >>.i lu mi'a visydonborka'ogei .i ku'i ko smajo'ukemvizyzva li'u >> " We seeing-(you-well)-glad. However, you! quiet-and-(here-at) " >> >I don't know about making it into a single word, but I probably would >expect more UI markers! (and maybe fewer predicates. And probably mi >instead of mi'a: if the speaker knows enough to say that "we" are glad, >she's probably speaking on behalf of "we"). It seems to be really difficult to use fewer predicates, but that way would certainly be better Lojban. >za'a kanro .ui Evidential-I-observe-that (something) is-healthy and-I-am-happy-about-it. .oicu'iro'o for physical-non-complaint. >.i re'inai .ei ko zvati ti Not-ready-to-receive obligation you! at this-indicated. I don't know about that "re'inai", how about "ta'a" 'interruption'. >.ui za'ase'i fu'iro'ose'inai ko zvati ti >Maybe even some cmavo replacement for zvati? .o'e is closeness. .i lu .oicu'iro'odai .ui .i ta'a o'edai " Physical-non-complaint-empathy glad. Interruption closeness-empathy .e'uga'i li'u suggest-haughty. " That starting to look a lot better. Now if the "ta'a" can be eliminated then all the cmavo can be squished together and scoped with "fu'e... fu'o" and we're there.