From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Apr 11 09:49:41 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 94022 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2005 16:49:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Apr 2005 16:49:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Apr 2005 16:49:40 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DL26V-0005zg-E2 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:49:39 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DL25t-0005ys-Sy; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:49:03 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:48:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DL25i-0005yi-Gw for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:48:50 -0700 Received: from web81303.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.78]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DL25h-0005yO-8T for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:48:50 -0700 Message-ID: <20050411164817.75692.qmail@web81303.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [65.69.48.37] by web81303.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:48:17 PDT Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:48:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 6667 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 9813 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0 X-eGroups-From: John E Clifford From: John E Clifford Reply-To: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net Subject: [lojban] Re: {X1 selbri X2} = {X2 se selbri X1}? X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 24170 --- Opi Lauma wrote: > > > Well, from the point of view of Tom, Mary may > look > > beautiful for some > > purpose, without Mary doing anything. Someone > may > > seem > > perfect for > > something without doing anything in > particular. > > >>from the point of view of Tom<< > 1. Mary and Tom are arguments of {tavla} (not > {melbi}), it is not said what are arguments of > {melbi}, i.e. it is not clear for whom it is > beautiful. > > >>beautiful for some purpose<< > 2. {melbi} should be related with {tavla}, if I > say > {la tam. melbi tavla la meris.} it means that > Tom is > beautiful as speaker, or may be that speech of > Tom is > beautiful, but it does not mean that Tom has > beautiful > face, for example. These are very sensible positions, BUT... The relation between {melbi} and {tavla} and just how Tom and Mary fit in are all pretty much up for grabs. It is fixed that Tom is talking to Mary and that beauty comes into it somewhere, but not where. It may be that Tom is a beautiful talker simply be cause he is beautiful (in the face, e.g.) and a talker, among countless other things (as has been noted). As you note, the arguments of {melbi} are unspecified: they might be Tom or Mary or something else altogether -- Tom's talking or its subject or .... It would be nice to have this more precise but, in the absence of context we cannot. We can only ask the speaker to spell it out a bit more. Tanru are always shorthand for a longer expression (or rather can almost always be expanded; they may not consciously be a collapsed version of something else)and there is nothing in the tanru alone (that is without a lot of context) to say how the expansion should go. There are a number of common patterns however -- but no guarantee that this is not an uncommon one. The most likely are that Tom's talking is itself beautiful in some way (what way is not even hinted at), or that Tom is beautiful and talking or that Tom is talking about beauty.