From pycyn@aol.com Wed Oct 02 12:01:47 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 77094 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d02.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.34) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 19:01:46 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.122.1825ae68 (4320) for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:01:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e@aol.com> Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:01:34 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tu'a zo tordu .e zo cmalu To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 16317 --part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/2/2002 9:58:11 AM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes: << > I don't see how cmalu is more/less comparative/measured. They both > have an x3 place. But the one-dimension distinction works fine for > me. >> I was reading off the gismu chart, which has {cmalu} as "compared to standard/norm x3," where {tordu} has "by measurement standard x3." I think these two notions are intertranslatable -- if different at all . So, yes, the dimensionality is probably the main thing. << > Why {tu'a}? Why not? >> {tu'a} presupposes and environment where an abstraction clause s likely to occur and replaces that abstraction by a sumti from within. What is the abstaction generating environment here. This is just curiosity, by the way; not complaint. xorxes << tordu: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i jarki: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i cinla: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i clani: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i ganra: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i rotsu: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i >> Thanks. I would tend to say {pamoi ralju} but am open to arguments on that -- different underlying idions, I suspect (and mine probably English and not Lojbanically defensible). And I would use {cimoi} rather than {romoi} just because I don't want to prejudge issues of possible dimensionality (I can see someone young being small in the temporal dimension, for example). --part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/2/2002 9:58:11 AM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:

<<

I don't see how cmalu is more/less comparative/measured. They both
have an x3 place. But the one-dimension distinction works fine for
me.

>>
I was reading off the gismu chart, which has {cmalu} as "compared to standard/norm x3," where {tordu} has "by measurement standard x3." I think these two notions are intertranslatable -- if different at all . So, yes, the dimensionality is probably the main thing.

<<
> Why {tu'a}?

Why not?
>>
{tu'a} presupposes and environment where an abstraction clause s likely to occur and replaces that abstraction by a sumti from within. What is the abstaction generating environment here. This is just curiosity, by the way; not complaint.

xorxes
<<
tordu: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
jarki: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
cinla: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i

clani: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
ganra: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
rotsu: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
>>
Thanks. I would tend to say {pamoi ralju} but am open to arguments on that -- different underlying idions, I suspect (and mine probably English and not Lojbanically defensible).
And I would use {cimoi} rather than {romoi} just because I don't want to prejudge issues of possible dimensionality (I can see someone young being small in the temporal dimension, for example).
--part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary--