From pycyn@aol.com Tue Apr 17 16:48:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 17 Apr 2001 23:48:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 94492 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2001 23:48:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Apr 2001 23:48:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r12.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.66) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Apr 2001 23:48:19 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r12.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.14.) id r.18.b6393fb (3956) for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:48:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <18.b6393fb.280e303d@aol.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:48:13 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Three (4) more questions To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_18.b6393fb.280e303d_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6623 --part1_18.b6393fb.280e303d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/17/2001 5:54:08 PM Central Daylight Time, lojbab@lojban.org writes: > On the other hand, it does constitute "lo valsi" if one allows for the fact > that unmarked-number is not necessarily singular. Still, most people tend > to think in terms of singular usages. > But as several words it is not a potential selbri -- it is so only as a structure, a string (at the surface) or the appropriate sort of tree or function or whatever your grammar thinks the depths look like. One of the words is a brivla, the others are not and become parts of a (potential) selbri only when properly combined. --part1_18.b6393fb.280e303d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/17/2001 5:54:08 PM Central Daylight Time,
lojbab@lojban.org writes:



On the other hand, it does constitute "lo valsi" if one allows for the fact
that unmarked-number is not necessarily singular.  Still, most people tend
to think in terms of singular usages.



But as several words it is not a potential selbri -- it is so only as a
structure, a string (at the surface) or  the appropriate sort of tree or
function or whatever your grammar thinks the depths look like.  One of the
words is a brivla, the others are not and become parts of a (potential)
selbri only when properly combined.
--part1_18.b6393fb.280e303d_boundary--