From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri Oct 22 13:12:36 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 43102 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2004 20:12:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Oct 2004 20:12:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Oct 2004 20:12:35 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CL5j2-0008Hf-SO for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:09:25 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CL5iC-0008Gl-R5; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:08:32 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web51610.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.38.215]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CL5hv-0008FN-0M for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:08:16 -0700 Message-ID: <20041022200740.70906.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [212.78.155.30] by web51610.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:07:40 PDT Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:07:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 8836 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jordimastrullenque@yahoo.com X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-From: jordi mas From: jordi mas Reply-To: jordimastrullenque@yahoo.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Help in examples ... X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23242 > > There's no such thing ... If we > > called the sumti "noun phrases", the gismu "simple > > > verbs" and so on, we could speak about lojban > grammar > > in English just fine. > I think that turns out not to be entirely the case. > {blanu}, for > example, is not well described as a "verb" because > it subsumes the > verb "to be". The selbri, and brivla in particular, > have almost > swayed her because of the unification offered by > predicates. Counter > examples to sumti=noun might get most of the way > there. I'm not speaking about that. We might conceivably say that {blanu} is a verb that means "is blue" or "to be blue". "is blue" is not a verb but works like a verb, in the same sense that "my father" is not a noun but works like a noun. All this is not precise, is methaphor. What I'm saying is that we may label things however we want as long as we get the meaning across. No particular way of labelling has magical effects. If someone wants to know how lojban works (I'm not saying to learn it), you must explain that {le karce cu blanu} means "car is blue", regardless of whether you say that {blanu} is a "gismu", a "verb" or a "pigeon". Using nouns that a lojbanist would approve off doesn't make things easier to understand at all. Regards, --jordi ===== _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com