From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sat Sep 28 15:28:34 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 28 Sep 2002 22:28:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 23953 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2002 22:28:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Sep 2002 22:28:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.64) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Sep 2002 22:28:33 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 15:28:33 -0700 Received: from 200.69.6.55 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 22:28:33 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 22:28:33 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2002 22:28:33.0561 (UTC) FILETIME=[612A9890:01C2673E] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.69.6.55] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 16174 la djorden cusku di'e > > baku zo'u ge mi klama la paris gi mi klama la romas > >This works in this case, but as we discussed it's not something you >can generally do unless you move every other tense (and in the paroi >case, move everything with a quantifier) into the prenex also to >preserve order. Of course, but exactly the same happens with {pa prenu}. You can't treat it separately from all other things that have relevant scope. > > ta'eku mi klama la paris e la romas > > > > This is: > > > > ta'eku zo'u ge mi klama la paris gi mi klama la romas > > Typically, I go both to Paris and to Rome. > >I agree with the first line (though, as I said above it doesn't work >in the general case without moving other shit into the prenex also) Of course, everything with scope that comes before it must move to the prenex before it. >but I think your translation to english is bad. I think the sentence >means the translation you give for the next sentence. To get the >sentence you said, I think you would need either > ta'eku mi klama la paris. jo'u la romas. >or > ta'eku mi klama la paris. joi la romas. Ok. That's a possibility. You're saying that tags never have scope over other sumti. Then when we apply this to {paroiku}: (1a) paroiku mi klama la paris e la romas expands to: (1b) paroiku mi klama la paris ije paroiku mi klama la romas And: (2a) paroiku mi klama ro le re tcadu expands to: (2b) roda voi tcadu zo'u paroiku mi klama da For each of the (two) cities, I once went to it. Also: (3) paroi le pavdei e le reldei mi klama la paris will expand to: (3a) paroi le pavdei mi klama la paris ije paroi le reldei mi klama la paris And similarly: (4) paroi ro le re djedi mi klama la paris will expand as: (4a) roda voi djedi zo'u paroi da mi klama la paris Q.E.D. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com