From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri May 05 09:57:34 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 2473 invoked from network); 5 May 2006 16:57:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.34) by m28.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 May 2006 16:57:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 May 2006 16:57:33 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fc3Z1-000402-J0 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:53:59 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fc3YL-0003yN-Va; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:53:18 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 05 May 2006 09:53:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fc3Xv-0003xx-Jy for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:52:51 -0700 Received: from web50210.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.38.51]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1Fc3Xu-0003xq-JK for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:52:51 -0700 Received: (qmail 28092 invoked by uid 60001); 5 May 2006 16:52:48 -0000 Message-ID: <20060505165248.28090.qmail@web50210.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.81.181.173] by web50210.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:52:48 PDT Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 09:52:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) X-archive-position: 11392 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: kitsune_e@yahoo.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Ed Blake From: Ed Blake Reply-To: kitsune_e@yahoo.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Usage of lo and le X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=shWm_5s4GlEXk1-VoyIkU-sctwO0Kan3vXTPBlGYK_BG4E3mtA X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 25808 --- Maxim Katcharov wrote: > ... > > {lo cribe cu citka lo jbari} - bear eat berry > {lo'e cribe cu citka lo jbari} - bears eat berries (the typical bear > eats berries) > {le cribe cu citka lo jbari} - a bear ate berries (or maybe I think > that bears will come and eat berries, whatever) > > ...yes? Confusing. > .u'i As a novice I would like to get into this conversation and muddy the waters a bit! In my understanding the difference between lo cribe and le cribe is that when I say "lo cribe cu citka lo jbari" I mean Actual bears eat Actual berries - while when I say "le cribe cu citka le jbari" I mean "there is some thing I'm calling a bear (which may or may not be vaguely resemble a bear) is eating something I'm calling 'berries' (regardless of whether they are really apples or papaya or people)". lo == the thing which (apparently) really is X le == the thing I'm calling X (which is not required to be a real X) So the usefulness of le is that you can describe things by their characteristics/behavior or any word you want to apply to them. While with lo you mean what you (exactly) say - no metaphor, no simile, no puns, etc. So is that it, or am I totaly decieved? 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.