From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Thu Jul 31 02:52:38 2003
Return-Path: <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 90568 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2003 09:52:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 31 Jul 2003 09:52:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lmsmtp04.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.114)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Jul 2003 09:52:36 -0000
Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-69-104.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.69.104])
	by lmsmtp04.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5673D47E98; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 11:52:34 +0200 (MEST)
Message-ID: <000e01c35749$7bf52b80$684579d5@oemcomputer>
To: "John Cowan" <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
Cc: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307301708300.18046-100000@moth.int.cec.wustl.edu> <013501c356f0$e4f7f120$3f3d0751@oemcomputer> <20030731015027.GB3024@mercury.ccil.org>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: le duX
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:52:35 +0100
Organization: Livagian Consulate
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20500

John:
> And Rosta scripsit:
>
> > I had assumed that co'e ranges across all possible relations, not across
> > all possible grammatical selbri. But I may be wrong; it may be that co'e
> > is indeed the counterpart of zo'e, in which case the question was
wrongly
> > reposed.
>
> co'e was indeed intended as a counterpart of zo'e, but I don't understand
> your distinction between "all possible relations" and "all possible
> grammatical selbri", unless it is a matter of referent and reference.

zo'e clearly ranges over words (specifically, grammatical sumti phrases),
not
referents/'things', since zo'e's range includes "su'oda" & arguably
"zi'o" --
which aren't referential.

I'm happy to accept that co'e, like zo'e, ranges over words rather than
relations (i.e. over expressions rather than meanings).

In that case, though, I should repose my question again, to something more
like the following.

bu'a  :  lo   :    da
go'a  :  --   :    ra
broda :  --   :    ke'a
co'e  : tu'o1 :    zo'e
????1 : tu'o2 :    zi'o
????2 :  le   :    ????3

????1 would substitute for "du" in "le du". ????3 would serve the function
that ledu-users use ledu for. ????2 would be what I had formerly thought
co'e to be.

--And.