From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun Oct 17 20:29:42 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 32633 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2004 03:29:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Oct 2004 03:29:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Oct 2004 03:29:42 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CJODC-0002R4-B7 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:29:30 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CJOCR-0002QO-TF; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:28:44 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CJOCF-0002QF-3c for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:28:31 -0700 Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:28:31 -0700 Message-ID: <20041018032831.GP21519@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <1098011322.18622.9.camel@ben> <20041018010514.99834.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041018010514.99834.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i X-archive-position: 8726 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban] Re: jordis X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23132 On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 06:05:13PM -0700, jordi mas wrote: > > Yes, and "do fanva" is an assertion that "do" is someone who > > translates. The le is not needed, and is IMO quite malglico. > > IMO you're missing the point. I actually *snarled* when I saw the "du", it's considered that bad stylistically. *However*, much as it bothers me by default, it *is* correct usage here. As Pierre, he had a *PARTICULAR* translator in mind. What he was asking was not "Are you the person who translated Abiword?", he was asking "I have a person in mind named jordis who translated Abiword; are you that person?". The only other way I can think of off the top of my head to ask the second question is "xu do me la jordis poi fanva la abiUORD.". As xorxes pointed out on the beginner's list, "du" is correct, both in usage and stylistically, when you are equating two things you have in mind. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"