From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Jul 21 07:16:55 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 165 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2003 14:16:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 21 Jul 2003 14:16:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Jul 2003 14:16:54 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19ebTC-0005aM-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 21 Jul 2003 07:16:54 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19ebSr-0005Zz-00; Mon, 21 Jul 2003 07:16:33 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 07:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postal.seas.wustl.edu ([128.252.145.2]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19ebSi-0005Zp-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2003 07:16:24 -0700 Received: from clarion.cec.wustl.edu (clarion.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.3]) by postal.seas.wustl.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6LDPT317467 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2003 08:25:29 -0500 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by clarion.cec.wustl.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h6LEGIGA018939 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 2003 09:16:18 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: clarion.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 09:16:18 -0500 (CDT) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: use of ko'a In-Reply-To: <006801c34f8e$3fc2fec0$55350751@oemcomputer> Message-ID: References: <0HID0000CLTCWA@mxout4.netvision.net.il> <20030721134231.GA57104@allusion.net> <006801c34f8e$3fc2fec0$55350751@oemcomputer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Status: No, -6.0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Report: -6.0/5.0 ---- Start SpamAssassin results -6.00 points, 5 required; * -0.0 -- Has a valid-looking References header * 1.1 -- From: does not include a real name * 0.0 -- Message-Id indicates a non-spam MUA (Pine) * -0.4 -- Has a In-Reply-To header * -0.4 -- Has a X-Authentication-Warning header * -0.5 -- BODY: Contains what looks like an email attribution * -5.4 -- BODY: Bayesian classifier says spam probability is 1 to 10% [score: 0.0143] * -0.4 -- BODY: Contains what looks like a quoted email text * 0.0 -- Reply with quoted text ---- End of SpamAssassin results X-archive-position: 5933 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: adam@cec.wustl.edu Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: adam@cec.wustl.edu From: lojban-out@lojban.org Reply-To: adam@cec.wustl.edu X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20415 On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, And Rosta wrote: > Translate English "They went." I can see two ways: > > 1. ko'a klama > 2. le du cu klama > > Neither uses anaphora, and I cannot see any way of using anaphora. Who went? "They" is anaphora, it's only meaningful in English when we've already been talking about some group. And if that's the case, there's nothing wrong with ra. I'm also curious why you couldn't translate "They went." as 3. klama which doesn't tell us a thing about who went, but neither does unbound ko'a. If you're going to have to glork who ko'a is, then why don't you just use zo'e the way it's intended? -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to *buy* her friends?