From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun Aug 13 18:17:09 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 40489 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2006 01:17:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Aug 2006 01:17:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Aug 2006 01:17:07 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GCR4j-0003Fy-T3 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:17:06 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GCR2M-0003ED-Q7; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:14:40 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:14:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GCR1v-0003E4-H7 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:14:11 -0700 Received: from web56410.mail.re3.yahoo.com ([216.252.111.89]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GCR1t-0003Dw-VI for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:14:11 -0700 Received: (qmail 28259 invoked by uid 60001); 14 Aug 2006 01:14:08 -0000 Message-ID: <20060814011408.28257.qmail@web56410.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Received: from [75.0.157.227] by web56410.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:14:08 PDT Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:14:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <737b61f30608121900g571c186bm1da4bd52b242831d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-2065610985-1155518048=:27374" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-archive-position: 12444 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: nathanielkrause@yahoo.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Nathaniel Krause From: Nathaniel Krause Reply-To: nathanielkrause@yahoo.com Subject: [lojban] Re: bumru X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=ENK3XxrE09TNAR3XOHo1TYy8Hw9gGysyiVNZuu-oEtQVRXwEGQ X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 26872 --0-2065610985-1155518048=:27374 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Chris Capel wrote: On 8/12/06, Matt Arnold wrote: > On 8/11/06, Yanis Batura wrote: > > The second means not fog itself, but the liquid, of which fog is composed. > > > > Wouldn't it be better that {bumru} had another definition: > > > > "x1 is fog covering consisting of x2 and covering x3" > > > > Please don't kill me! ;) > > > > "Liquid of which fog is composed" _is_ the fog itself. It cannot _not_ > be fog. {tu se bumru} is precisely what is meant. I can't think of any example off the top of my head, but I remember that some gismu have two different places that refer technically to the same aspect of an object, but from different perspectives. So if {bumru} did work like that, it wouldn't be unique among gismu. Chris Capel -- Perhaps one ought to use {dilnu} if one wishes to speak of the fog as an object as distinct from its contents. -sen --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates. --0-2065610985-1155518048=:27374 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/12/06, Matt Arnold wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Yanis Batura wrote:
> > The second means not fog itself, but the liquid, of which fog is composed.
> >
> > Wouldn't it be better that {bumru} had another definition:
> >
> > "x1 is fog covering consisting of x2 and covering x3"
> >
> > Please don't kill me! ;)
> >
>
> "Liquid of which fog is composed" _is_ the fog itself. It cannot _not_
> be fog. {tu se bumru} is precisely what is meant.

I can't think of any example off the top of my head, but I remember
that some gismu have two different places that refer technically to
the same aspect of an object, but from different perspectives. So if
{bumru} did work like that, it wouldn't be unique among gismu.

Chris Capel
--
Perhaps one ought to use {dilnu} if one wishes to speak of the fog as an object as distinct from its contents.

-sen

How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates. --0-2065610985-1155518048=:27374--