From sentto-44114-20095-1054682629-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Tue Jun 03 21:23:05 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 03 Jun 2003 21:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n32.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.100]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19NPne-0006zM-00 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Tue, 03 Jun 2003 21:22:58 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-20095-1054682629-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.199] by n32.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jun 2003 23:23:50 -0000 X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 20260 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 23:23:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jun 2003 23:23:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO blackcat.ixazon.lan) (208.150.110.21) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 23:23:49 -0000 Received: by blackcat.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 7DA8944A9; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 23:23:48 +0000 (UTC) Organization: dis To: lojban@yahoogroups.com User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <200306031923.48119.phma@webjockey.net> From: Pierre Abbat MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 19:23:48 -0400 Subject: [lojban] Re: I saw three kinds of dogs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-archive-position: 5593 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@webjockey.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Tuesday 03 June 2003 19:09, oskar2379 wrote: > --- In lojban@yahoogroups.com, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > How do you say that in colloquial Lojban? {ci da zo'u mi viska lo > > gerku be da} > > > is formal, and {mi viska lo gerku be ci da} is wrong because a dog > > doesn't > > > belong to three breeds at once. > > How could the first be right and the second not? They both mean "I > see dogs of three breeds". The book made it seem like prenexes only > exist to allow you to declare variables in the beginning and use them > multiple times and/or in a different order in the main bridi. It > never said anything the entire meaning changing when the prenex is > dropped... {ci da zo'u mi viska lo gerku be da} is equivalent to {ci da su'o de poi gerku da zo'u mi visku de} "There are three breeds such that there is at least one dog of that breed which I see", while {mi viska lo gerku be ci da} is equivalent to {su'o de ci da poi selge'u de zo'u mi viska de} "There is at least one thing such that it is a dog of three breeds which I see". An absent prenex is equivalent to a prenex with all variables in the same order as in the bridi. phma -- .i toljundi do .ibabo mi'afra tu'a do .ibabo damba do .ibabo do jinga .icu'u la ma'atman. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/GSaulB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/