Message-ID: <349EBF83.AF0@locke.ccil.org> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 14:29:07 -0500 From: John Cowan Organization: Lojban Peripheral X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lojban List Subject: Re: whether (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism) References: <199712221817.NAA24888@locke.ccil.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 666 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 22 14:29:07 1997 X-From-Space-Address: - la .and. cusku di'e > What I am saying is that I don't think you can take all the > different places where Q-kau is used, contrast them with > q-kau-less counterparts, and then find some element of meaning > that Q-kau contributes in every case. I agree. BTW, note that zo'ekau = makau, co'ekau=mokau, etc. It's perfectly OK to use an indefinite (or an unassigned ko'V or brodV or dV or bu'V) instead of a Q-word, since none of them entail any presupposed answer. > I think {frica} is {na dunli}, isn't it? Is there a difference? "frica" is closer to "na mintu", I think. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban