From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Apr 26 16:33:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 70840 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2006 23:27:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m30.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Apr 2006 23:27:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2006 23:27:39 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FYtPG-0001wy-SU for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:26:51 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FYtNo-0001vS-DV; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:25:22 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:25:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FYtNJ-0001uL-NB for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:24:49 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.232]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FYtNG-0001uC-HF for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:24:49 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 57so1824921wri for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.117.20 with SMTP id p20mr3905565wrc; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.126.18 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d17560604261624k4a322621v907490d5265abe56@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:24:45 -0300 In-Reply-To: <12d58c160604261500y121498f5q593ef1ef5b562afb@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060426215216.77533.qmail@web81312.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <12d58c160604261500y121498f5q593ef1ef5b562afb@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 11341 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 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: About jboselkei reviews X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=cREQ95xEPqiNdVzkd_dFxiGBZkW_8dzdkDCAI_8OB_cVxG14Bw X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 25756 On 4/26/06, komfo,amonan wrote: > > From the definitions I gather that {ka'e} is restricted to innate ability > while {kakne} refers to ability innate or learned. mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan The problem with that definition is that {ka'e} applies to a selbri, and it doesn't make much sense to say that a relationship has innate capabilities. What would {le mlatu ka'e kavbu le smacu} mean? That the cat is innately capable of catching the mouse, that the mouse is innately capable of being caught by the cat, that they are both innately capable of being in the {kavbu} relationship? And the trap/restraint x3, does it also have to be innately capable? What if one of the arguments is not something that can have innate capabilities, would {ka'e} not be usable then? {jinzi kakne} is better for "innate capability", and there it is perfectly clear whose innate capability we are talking about. It is not something that comes up very often anyway, so it hardly needs to be done with a cmavo. {ka'e} just cannot be about capabilities, be they innate or learned. 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.