From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:48:59 2010
Return-Path: <LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI
Received: (qmail 2961 invoked from network); 15 Apr 1997 00:37:09 -0000
Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6)
  by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 15 Apr 1997 00:37:09 -0000
Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <14.613718E0@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 2:37:09 +0100
Date:         Mon, 14 Apr 1997 15:58:11 -0300
Reply-To:     Esteban Flamini <eflamini@UNS.EDU.AR>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Esteban Flamini <eflamini@UNS.EDU.AR>
Subject:      Re: ma'oste
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1651
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <erXUkG71UKI.A.NHH.bx0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

>mi zbasu le selma'o porsi ma'oste .i mo djica lenu mi benji ti do
>
>I have prepared a cmavo list in selma'o order. Who would like me to send it
>to you?

I think this needs a little correction. The second lojban sentence should be

1. ma djica lenu mi benji ti

Note that 'mo' asks for a bridi (predication), not for a sumti (argument).
Right?

Well, the question being asked is problematic. What is being asked is:

2. Who is that X who wants the list to be sent to X?

while (1) can be translated

3. Who wants me to send it?

leaving the receiver unspecified. In any case, the pragmatics of the
situation would plausibly force the hearer to interpret (1) as (2), rather
than (3). So, if John Doe replies to the 'ma' by saying "Me!" then you can
infer that John Doe wants the list to be sent to him (John Doe), and not
anyone else. Suppose, however, that you want to restate (1) to make this
assumption appear explicitly in it. Then you need some way to refer to the
answer to the question within the question itself.

I think one way would be to say

ma goi ko'a djica lenu mi benji ti ko'a

Does anyone know a shorter way (for I could think of *longer* ways!) ;-)

In any case, I'm not sure the following works:

ma djica lenu mi benji ti do

as 'do' refers to the hearer, not to the answer to 'ma'. What do you think?

co'o mi'e .esteban.
=======================================
A note for recreational lojban-grammar:

'ma' questions are supposed to be answered with a sumti; and in any sentence
'di'e' refers to the next utterance; then there could be a (funny) compact
way to express (2):

ma djica lenu mi benji ti di'e

What do you think?