From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Sat Feb 10 09:09:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 10 Feb 2001 17:09:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 45693 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2001 17:09:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Feb 2001 17:09:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mv.egroups.com) (10.1.1.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 17:09:08 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Received: from [10.1.10.125] by mv.egroups.com with NNFMP; 10 Feb 2001 17:09:07 -0000 Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:09:05 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: kau Message-ID: <963sjh+7nc7@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <57.1166baff.27b6b2be@aol.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 857 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 193.149.49.79 From: "A.W.T." X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 5374 --- In lojban@y..., pycyn@a... wrote: > In a message dated 2/10/2001 4:23:16 AM Central Standard Time, > Ti@f... writes: > > > > co'o mi'e *la* .aulun. > > (BTW, don't you think that "la" is necessary with names to indicate that it > > isn't just the name/label etc. itself but a person referred > > to by it?) > > > Nope, not in this case. {mi'e} is used to introduce the label to be applied > to the speaker, not to introduce the speaker, and that label is "aulun" The > {la} is needed in other contexts to show its function there, as a sumti, but > here the label is mentioned, not used. je'e .ui ki'ecai .i mi'e .aulun. poi bebna jbopre (I'm wondering how - other than in vocative constructions - a relative clause or phrase could be attached to a sumti altered to a selbri by {me} e.g. in: ti me le la kraislr. karce ...)