From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Jan 12 10:30:11 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:30:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ex7Cs-0006Qo-Ec for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:29:54 -0800 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.194]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ex7Cp-0006Qh-2q for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:29:54 -0800 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id r28so479045nza for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:29:50 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:from:to:references:subject:date:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole; b=GtM5T17DAgwrTnB/x/qLYHyVqaT28SlHd5LqH9ZmTe8SDUgnFNybxKc/kjmv4n70Ne7ngIGSMmVfLOEzba6zulNmrAhqfhYMTSYUbadQh5mCCKRtodpjAbPTyg4AqSo5D0hsh8efDKv/cLaGxJo+FUOk1MijA3CG6jeH2AOJXn0= Received: by 10.36.121.4 with SMTP id t4mr2024055nzc; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:29:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from caroe1 ( [65.218.132.157]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id r15sm1142370nza.2006.01.12.10.29.48; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:29:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <005801c617a5$e5229790$a0d2400a@caroe1> From: "Betsemes" To: References: <20060109182638.GD32187@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20060109192911.17256.qmail@web81311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <925d17560601091209oe88d19ga9507242b9fccb18@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: cmevla a class of brivla Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 14:27:48 -0400 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1506 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-archive-position: 11046 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: betsemes@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Is there a proposal? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jorge Llambías" To: Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 4:09 PM Subject: [lojban] Re: cmevla a class of brivla > On 1/9/06, John E Clifford wrote: > > Of course, the uncertainty about > > what {me} means (there are at least three so far > > today) doesn't help, but anything like it would > > be subject to similar problems of excessive > > length. > > According to the current baseline (CLL) {me } > means: x1 is/are among the referents of "". > > The old (ma'oste) definition was: x1 is specific to in aspect x2 > > What's the third possibility? > > > But obviously some device is needed to > > use sumti as predicates, else ambiguity results. > > In addition to {me } there are {me moi} and all > the other {me MOI}s that convert a sumti into a predicate. > > The place structure I use for {me moi} is > "x1 is/are 's x2 by rule/relationship x3", which, while not > exactly the same as the old {me }, does cover a similar > ground. > > I haven't found any uses for the rest of the MOIs yet. > > > Whether it needs to be as complex as it often now > > is is less clear. In particular, can cmevla -- > > not whole sumti -- be used directly without problems? > > Can they be so used with the current gramma? No. > > Could the grammar be modified to allow it? Yes, trivially. > > Would it cause problems? It depends what you mean by > "problems". It would require using a {cu} that is currently > allowed but not required. You'd have to say {la djan cu klama} > instead of just {la djan klama}. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if > you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help. > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.