From adam@pubcrawler.org Mon Oct 25 21:04:59 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:05:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postal.seas.wustl.edu ([128.252.21.102]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CMIZQ-0002qk-Pm for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:04:29 -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 i9Q29Al07614; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:09:10 -0500 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by clarion.cec.wustl.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i9Q2GVqG017636; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:16:35 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: clarion.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:16:31 -0500 (CDT) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: possessives In-Reply-To: <537d06d00410251149bd1f6c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <417D0787.5040902@bilkent.edu.tr> <537d06d00410251149bd1f6c2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Status: No, -6.4 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Report: -6.4/5.0 ---- Start SpamAssassin results -6.40 points, 5 required; * 0.0 -- Message-Id indicates a non-spam MUA (Pine) * -0.0 -- Has a valid-looking References header * -0.4 -- Has a X-Authentication-Warning header * -0.4 -- Has a In-Reply-To header * -0.5 -- BODY: Contains what looks like an email attribution * -4.7 -- BODY: Bayesian classifier says spam probability is 10 to 20% [score: 0.1307] * -0.4 -- BODY: Contains what looks like a quoted email text * 0.0 -- Reply with quoted text ---- End of SpamAssassin results X-archive-position: 8859 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: adam@pubcrawler.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Philip Newton wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:54:42 -0500 (CDT), Adam D. Lopresto > wrote: > > And I'd much sooner use {be} where appropriate, eg {le speni be do}, {loi kerfa > > be do}. Slightly longer, but most specific. > > Somebody at one point pointed out that he didn't see any use for > {po'e}, since the "obvious" cases (including the ones usually used as > examples - e.g. people's limbs, a book inalienably connected with its > author, etc.), {be} will work in the "obvious" brivla. > > Can someone think of a case for {po'e} that can't be replaced by {be}? Well, {pruxi} has come up a few times, translated (perhaps over broadly) as "soul". In general, though, pretty much any time you have an inalienable relationship between one object and another, if it's not part of the place structure, it should be. > > mu'o mi'e .filip. > -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ What exactly do we mean when we use the word "semantics"?