From lojbab@lojban.org Mon Nov 17 19:54:22 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 57727 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2003 03:54:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Nov 2003 03:54:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao03.cox.net) (68.1.17.242) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Nov 2003 03:54:21 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org ([68.228.12.146]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with ESMTP id <20031118035420.IYNP2192.lakemtao03.cox.net@bob.lojban.org> for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:54:20 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20031117225022.03043940@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: lojbab@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:55:49 -0500 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: {Archivist} niltei? In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20031117152400.03640ec0@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Bob LeChevalier X-Originating-IP: 68.1.17.242 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 21207 At 01:07 AM 11/18/03 +0000, jjllambias2000 wrote: >--- In lojban@yahoogroups.com, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > > At 10:45 PM 11/16/03 -0800, Robin wrote: > > > > > >Anyways, the theory here is that you can do > > > > > > li muno cu niltei lo nanca le mi mivytei > > > > > >for "I am 50 years old", right? > > > > That was the theory, whether people choose to accept it or not %^) >I'm > > equally amenable to dropping the x2 in favor of lo nanca be li muno >for > > x1. The point was to distinguish the interval from its measurement. > >The interval goes in the x1 of nanca, and the measurement in x2, >right? The double meaning of ni shows in that you are equally happy >with either for the x1 of ni. "Happy"? Rather, I am "accepting". Since I never bought into jvajvo 100%, I can accept that people might choose one or the other based on aesthetics or brevity, and both work. >Since you can say {le mi mivytei cu nanca li muno}, > it is not clear what {niltei} adds. It adds niltei as a selbri for the concept. I'm not sure I ever claimed anything more than that. not all selbri will be immensely useful. -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.) Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org