From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Mon Jun 02 18:25:41 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 15810 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 01:25:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jun 2003 01:25:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lmsmtp03.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.113) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 01:25:40 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-66-241.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.66.241]) by lmsmtp03.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76ECA3CF06 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 03:25:38 +0200 (MEST) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] I saw three kinds of dogs Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 02:25:37 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <200306022000.16883.phma@webjockey.net> From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20053 Pierre: > 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 Heaven forfend that we should perpetuate the notion that the former is not colloquial, since overt prenexes are often unavoidable, except by not saying what one really means. Seriously, zo'u is *the* way. The Lojban design provides a way to say it, and zo'u is it. So the answer to your question is to make zo'u colloquial. Then it's easy to say in colloquial Lojban. --And.