Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 18:41:42 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199801062341.SAA13980@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Re: Adjectives X-To: lojban To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1334 X-From-Space-Date: Tue Jan 6 18:41:53 1998 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU >>ti tavla sutra cutci mi >>This is meaningless gibberish, because it makes no sense for tavla to >>modify sutra. The other way around is ok, because "fast" is a way in >>which I can talk, but it makes no sense for "talk" to modify "fast". >>Correct? >No. It means a (talk-to-somebody-about-something-in-some-language kind- >of fast-at-doing-something) kind-of shoe worn by me. This might make >sense for example in a context where we know the talkers walk at one >speed and non-talkers walk at a different speed; or a shoe designed for >moving at a talking speed (whatever that might mean). Or lots of other >interpretations. I've heard that for best results in exercising to lose weight, you can = gauge your exertion based on how hard it is to talk; if you're puffing = so hard you can't talk, you might be going a little too fast, and = burning sugar rather than fat (or something like that). So a tavla = sutra cutci might be a shoe designed for jogging for weight loss. (NB = I'm not a doctor or a linguist -- consult a licensed professional for = medical or semantic advice. Talk to me if your website is busted. :-) ) >>Page 13 in the book says that the x2 position for cutci specifies the >>foot that is wearing the shoe. I am simply using "mi", to indicate me >>(my foot). Is this valid? >Yes Why? co'o mi'e kris