Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 19:52:33 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712130052.TAA26555@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Carl Burke Sender: Lojban list From: Carl Burke Subject: Re: Carl Burke's question X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1163 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Dec 12 19:52:34 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU At 09:42 PM 12/12/97 -0300, you wrote: >>>i tai ma la lojban ckape le nu le se bangrxesperanto cu nanmu >>>Kiel minacas Lojxbano la virecon de la esperantistoj? >>>How does Lojban threaten the manhood of Esperantists? >> >>Assuming 'tai' binds a single sumti, and substituting >>'ka' for 'nu', it makes sense. > >Yes, tai binds a single sumti. Remember that {nu} works for >states as well, which is sometimes obscured by the term "event". Oh... I thought states were the default; guess I'd better get my book order in. >>>i mo le se bangrxesperanto pe secau le ka nanmu >>>Kaj kio pri la esperantistoj sen vireco? >>>And what about those esperantists without manhood? >> >>still processing... > >Hint: some Esperantists are female... Oh, that I got. What I didn't have yet (still don't) is text for the distinction between 'without manhood' as female and 'without manhood' as lacking the 'manly virtues', or whatever I could come up with as 'manhood' in the sense I think it was originally meant. (Certainly lojban doesn't threaten the manhood of Esperantists in a Lorena Bobbitt sense, unless you're wielding Occam's Razor.) -- Carl Burke cburke@mitre.org