From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Apr 04 11:29:28 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 9037 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2005 18:29:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Apr 2005 18:29:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Apr 2005 18:29:21 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DIWJn-0006Wq-3Y for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:28:59 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DIWJX-0006Vw-Dm; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:28:45 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DIWJC-0006Vf-29 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:28:22 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.199]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DIWJ8-0006V0-R8 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:28:22 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so1658735wri for ; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:27:47 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=fKXpP7NPEEC8hzIjcqqlR/lCt0vDZsOPACSkev4qdKUigYzThlktdQY/h7aC/U9wOGOAp3FQqGhyqGaPNFZvKD2aXg65mE3XBINC+UtBGFEH71Nfni6vGGIB1nfnzTUmjLhRQvll1ofweFCHyo9c7OVK6pvOg1BeRLK6L8qhn3I= Received: by 10.54.77.17 with SMTP id z17mr602492wra; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.69.3 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Apr 2005 11:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d1756050404112764e3c26a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 15:27:47 -0300 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 9763 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0 X-eGroups-From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= Reply-To: jjllambias@gmail.com Subject: [lojban] Re: tanru X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 24119 On Apr 4, 2005 1:17 PM, opi_lauma wrote: > > Is this vagueness of the considered sentence are documented in > official lojban grammar or may be it is just "projection" of the > corresponding English translation? No, in this case it is vague by design. See for example: Actually I see no necessity to > approve the considered vagueness on the grammatical level. I see no > necessity to have a possibility to construct sentences with the given > type of vagueness. From my point of view it would be better to > postulate that (for example): > > "sumti1 selbri2 selbri1 sumti2" = "lo nu sumti1 selbri1 sumti2 cu selbri2" > It is > "la tam. melbi tavla la meris" = "lo nu la tam tavla la meris cu melbi". tanru are the simplest way to modify predicates, so the idea is to make them usable with many different types of modification. If we restrict it to one type, then we can't use it for other common types, such as: ta blabi xirma That's a white horse. That's unlikely to be interpreted as {lo nu ta xirma cu blabi}. In general, which tanru interpretation applies is fairly clear from context. When it is not clear, you need to use more words to make the intention more explicit. mu'o mi'e xorxes