From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Sat Apr 14 10:57:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 14 Apr 2001 17:57:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 46397 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2001 17:57:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Apr 2001 17:57:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Apr 2001 17:57:16 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Received: from [10.1.10.97] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Apr 2001 17:57:16 -0000 Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 17:57:14 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Cmavo to never use Message-ID: <9ba31q+nt8s@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <20010414123213.A475@twcny.rr.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Length: 1220 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 193.149.49.79 From: "A.W.T." X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6537 --- In lojban@y..., Rob Speer wrote: > (in response to http://balance.wiw.org/~jkominek/lojban/9411/msg00275.htm= =3D=0D l) >=20 > I disagree that {la'i} is useless. Things that might share other > characteristics because of sharing a name would be _objects_ that are nam= =3D=0D ed. >=20 > {le karce vecnu pu vecnu la'i porc.} - The car salesman sold a set of Por= =3D=0D sches. >=20 > In fact, because of this, I think that there should be a {la} equivalent = =3D=0D to > {lo'e} and {le'e}. Using xa'e for this purpose (is it used already?) you = =3D=0D could > say something like {xa'e pakrd. bel. poi skami cu spofu} - "The typical > Packard Bell computer is broken." lo'e/le'e la pakrd. bel. skami cu spofu lo'e la makintoc skami na ka'e spofu ;-) lo'e la porc. karce cu sutra gi'e kargu mi .oi le rupnu Don't think that {xa'e} is necessary/really useful, unless for expressing n= =3D=0D onsensical ideas like I often use to do: "Alle M=FCllers sind Bankr=E4uber oder Vergewaltiger" (xa'e muler. cu gi'a = banx=3D=0D a danre bo zerle'a gi zergle), yet couldn't even this be=20 accomplished by {lo'e la muler. prenu cu gi'a banxa danre bo zerle'a gi zer= =3D=0D gle}? co'o mi'e .aulun.