From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Mon Nov 22 18:57:27 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 24969 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2004 02:57:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Nov 2004 02:57:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Nov 2004 02:57:26 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CWQrt-00018x-LZ for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:57:25 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CWQqg-00017V-NZ; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:56:10 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:56:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from web41903.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.154]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CWQqT-00017F-Tt for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:55:58 -0800 Received: (qmail 45458 invoked by uid 60001); 23 Nov 2004 02:55:26 -0000 Message-ID: <20041123025526.45456.qmail@web41903.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.45.146.162] by web41903.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:55:26 PST Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:55:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20041123021443.GI24376@chain.digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 9038 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 From: Jorge "Llambías" Reply-To: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Subject: [lojban] Re: Archivist/Founders: {ri'a nai} vs. {se mau nai} X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=142311107 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23441 --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 09:12:20AM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > > > My first guess for {to'e rinka} would be {se rinka}, the opposite > > of the cause is the effect. > > That's net nearly as useful, of course. Right. {to'e rinka} might also be {fanta}. > > Saying that "despite" is the opposite of "because" is like saying > > that "all" is the opposite of "some", or that "and" is the > > opposite of "or", or that "must" is the opposite of "may". They > > are in some kind of opposition (they are duals) but I wouldn't use > > {to'e} for it. > > Do you have a better way to say "despite"? {fi'o na fanta}, "not prevented by..." If {to'e rinka} = {fanta}, then {to'e ri'a nai} gives "despite", and this way we get the different flavors as well: {to'e ri'a nai}, {to'e ki'u nai}, {to'e mu'i nai}, {to'e ni'i nai}. mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com