From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Oct 20 16:43:15 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 95653 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2004 23:43:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166) by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 20 Oct 2004 23:43:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Oct 2004 23:43:15 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CKQ6q-0000gt-TJ for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:43:13 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CKQ5h-0000g9-7N; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:42:01 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:41:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tx4.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.173]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CKQ5V-0000fx-Kw for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:41:50 -0700 Received: from scan4.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.177] helo=localhost) by tx4.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1CKQ5Q-0004OI-Fm for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:41:44 +0100 Received: from rx4.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.172]) by localhost (scan4.mail.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.177]) (amavisd-new, port 25) with ESMTP id 16582-04 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:41:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from dh178.chch.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.120.178] helo=chch.ox.ac.uk) by rx4.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1CKQ5Q-0004OD-F9 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:41:44 +0100 Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:41:44 +0100 Message-ID: <20041020234144.GB5205@thedave.chch.ox.ac.uk> References: <20041020173832.GA15196@thedave.chch.ox.ac.uk> <20041020221835.9156.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041020221835.9156.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6 X-cunselcu'a-valsi: sanga User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-archive-position: 8814 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jboste@zugzwang.port5.com X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-From: Martin Bays From: Martin Bays Reply-To: jboste@zugzwang.port5.com Subject: [lojban] Re: jordis X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23220 * Wednesday, 2004-10-20 at 15:18 -0700 - jordi mas : > > > But anyway --- are you sure that displacing sumti towards the front to > > > show emphasis is not malrarbau? > > Well it's certainly an informal and inexact way of doing it, whether or > > not it works for not-just-natlang reasons - which makes it arguably > > unlojbanic. I think CLL mentions that it is generally understood this way, > > but what difference that makes I'm not sure. > Somehow I feel it to be unlojbanic, but don't > ask me why. Well we should probably leave it to the proper lojbanists to tell us what is and isn't lojbanic. Opinions, proper lojbanists? > Which of the following three statements > do you feel to be more accurate? > > (1) CLL says {mi tavla do}, {do se tavla mi}, > {mi do tavla}, {tavla fa mi do}, {tavla fe do fa mi}, > {fe mi fa do se tavla}... mean exactly the same > thing. > > (2) In practice people do use {do se tavla mi} for > {ba'e mi tavla do} though CLL says they shouldn't. > > (3) according to CLL, {do se tavla mi} is short for > {ba'e mi tavla do}. Here's what I can actually find to quote (http://www.lojban.org/publications/reference_grammar/chapter9.html): """ All of the variant forms in this section and following sections can be used to place emphasis on the part or parts which have been moved out of their standard places. Thus, [25]Example 2.2 places emphasis on the selbri (because it is at the end); [26]Example 2.3 emphasizes ``la bastn.'', because it has been moved before the selbri. Moving more than one component may dilute this emphasis. It is permitted, but no stylistic significance has yet been established for drastic reordering. """