From pycyn@aol.com Mon Jun 11 11:37:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 11 Jun 2001 18:37:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 15315 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2001 18:37:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jun 2001 18:37:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r10.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.106) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jun 2001 18:37:01 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id r.32.1643102f (4235) for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:36:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <32.1643102f.285669c3@aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:36:51 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Purpose of bridi To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_32.1643102f.285669c3_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 7810 --part1_32.1643102f.285669c3_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 6/11/2001 12:40:23 PM Central Daylight Time, ragnarok@pobox.com writes: > i le bengo cu simsa le gapru gi'e le gapru cu sisma le bengo nei prupla le > {bengo} means Bengali -- {cnita}? {sisma} is {simsa} (welcome to the independent-finger typing school). {simsa} is weaker that {dunli} or {mintu} and I think the passage can take the stronger form. {gi'e} is for brid-tails, I think (though I am not sure what they are) and this seems to connect complete bridi. I am unsure how to use {nei} except in {nei jetfa} but I don't think it is actually in the preceding bridi -- so you want an {.i} (which, in this context, you don't need at the beginning) and then {di'u}. The rest then says "this utterance planned that someone do the one and only thing-({dacni} > {dacti}) function (? {facnu} > {fancu})" Minimally, I suspect that {pa} modifies {dacti} and is not the internal quantifier with {le}, so maybe {pa zei dacti} or {dacti pamei}. And I think that {prupla} is either the wrong brivla altogether or that you need a different choice of places to use, {di'u se prupla fi le nu...}? Good first shot in that it brings out nicely where the big problems are and gets some things tacked down. --part1_32.1643102f.285669c3_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 6/11/2001 12:40:23 PM Central Daylight Time,
ragnarok@pobox.com writes:



i le bengo cu simsa le gapru gi'e le gapru cu sisma le bengo nei prupla le
nu gasnu le pa dacni fasnu.ue




{bengo} means Bengali -- {cnita}? {sisma} is {simsa} (welcome to the
independent-finger typing school). {simsa} is weaker that {dunli} or {mintu}
and I think the passage can take the stronger form. {gi'e} is for brid-tails,
I think (though I am not sure what they are)  and this seems to connect
complete bridi.  I am unsure how to use {nei} except in {nei jetfa} but I
don't think it is actually in the preceding bridi -- so  you want an {.i}
(which, in this context, you don't need at the beginning) and then {di'u}.  
The rest then says "this utterance planned that someone do the one and only
thing-({dacni} > {dacti}) function (? {facnu} > {fancu})"  Minimally, I
suspect that {pa} modifies {dacti} and is not the internal quantifier with
{le}, so maybe {pa zei dacti} or {dacti pamei}.  And I think that {prupla} is
either the wrong brivla altogether or that you need a different choice of
places to use, {di'u se prupla fi le nu...}?
Good first shot in that it brings out nicely where the big problems are and
gets some things tacked down. --part1_32.1643102f.285669c3_boundary--