From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 28 09:16:25 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MVpLl-0000AE-0I for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:16:25 -0700 Received: from web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.121]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MVpLh-000094-CD for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:16:24 -0700 Received: (qmail 44958 invoked by uid 60001); 28 Jul 2009 16:16:15 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1248797775; bh=eogc6fAUydADBn0p3pZwhb2/8gpgA6YGthi6W4gCKuo=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dKhxmfyByNGKEP6w/7Hita+RNt8RRYkVACJzNRhvCYiKHQZ/aXAKFucS5JzqeRI4ozLpfhxCm0EjREoDFna7ox6+7XVXL2FU00BKP7YEtfxNb1IzJjwa4EzyYuKMNK8cIwi6aPZ3wsMN4gPUZzoIVtdfJkOE5Ab4GNaLK/8KMYg= DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=xz0UgGlXckip43F7T+Wt60D9fD0Q71KFr5veuhjsszdh2K+FoZsfHYBc+0Y1XQbZSTqCIPhcX3y0rsw1bHjtkhKFKyr9XIjmd6iXTKQ9nGnrKx0HYT1E6Wvb+l0hdEmITmGZ/kcaVWYbMcMnCUBQqTYVp89GINot5BOj6/du4Qs=; Message-ID: <253195.41523.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: NOORVHcVM1kNkxdIoBxRb_CbALk4R3T2P68cSOmfdkSsqS1_vZacTWsUG.ouVAn2SKQEyYjqbftBKqL6MKVMCL7WjFs.v9IpQgRUQV_n2dNUZmDqhZgGejb7de0T_JQf..ZPu.wGieX5HV2WidIloumGAJTElUc_AnD1i_pXSSXXRVyQ7219cF8DpAyqhPaJBeE6FSIQNITFxnDunQxftoi60fxpV2eB00lqIUfvScxQRrnsKOpNqJ2EGkBAfhJzYVc8flI3ypGKLSFhm3mcOGsLAm_EGjibB2EoNgRVWIjqTMROgw4xUwXmuaqFVQkRwBGa7n5cd6G9G6WNmThI9xHeN75vpQ-- Received: from [24.207.224.145] by web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:16:15 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1357.22 YahooMailWebService/0.7.289.10 References: <200907280045.44937.phma@phma.optus.nu> <96f789a60907280533n45388b3dg4d9e7596e5c1e541@mail.gmail.com> <200907280859.09514.phma@phma.optus.nu> <96f789a60907280709h7960f3fftc2c9a5a083360ed2@mail.gmail.com> <664922.39992.qm@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <5715b9300907280903t63cd372du13da398fe2e4b7ac@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:16:15 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: elliptical sentences To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <5715b9300907280903t63cd372du13da398fe2e4b7ac@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1156200196-1248797775=:41523" X-archive-position: 15823 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --0-1156200196-1248797775=:41523 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Oh my, it is hat bad. What now serves the purpose of veridical 'le', 'something(s) that actually are ...'? ________________________________ From: Luke Bergen To: lojban-list@lojban.org Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 11:03:48 AM Subject: [lojban] Re: elliptical sentences if I'm remembering correctly, under xorlo {lo} means something like "having something to do with", with no implications of actual existence, whether it is in the speakers mind only, or whether it _really is_ a specific instance of whatever it is that you're talking about. Whereas {le} means that you have a specific thing in mind although I don't believe it makes any truth claims about whether or not it _really is_. So "le gerku" would mean "I have an actual thing in mind that I'm calling 'dog' " while "lo gerku" would mean "there is something that I'm choosing to refer to as 'dog' ". Did I get that right? It's taken me forever to really get the hang of lo/le. - Luke Bergen On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:57 AM, John E Clifford wrote: Oh dar God, what has 'lo' become now > > > ________________________________ From: Michael Turniansky >To: lojban-list@lojban.org >Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 9:09:29 AM >Subject: [lojban] Re: elliptical sentences > > > > > >On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote: > >On Tuesday 28 July 2009 08:33:56 Michael Turniansky wrote: >>>>> Huh? Am I missing something here? What's elliptical about it? >>>>> --gejyspa >> >>The complete statement would be "The genes for seeing red and green are on the >>>>X chromosome; the gene for seeing blue is on the 7th chromosome". The gene >>>>for seeing red isn't red, so calling it "lo xunre" isn't literally right. Do >>>>I have to say at least "lo xunre co'e"? >> > > > Ah, now I understand, and further understand why you mentioned "jgina" in your first message. Taken completely out of context, I had no idea what the English sentence meant. I thought you were just talking about abstract things... well, let's see.. you could certainly get away with saying "le" rather than "lo" since even in xorlo there's no implication that it's actually colored that way. > > --gy > > > > > > > --0-1156200196-1248797775=:41523 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Oh my, it is hat bad.  What now serves the purpose of veridical 'le', 'something(s) that actually are ...'?

From: Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 11:03:48 AM
Subject: [lojban] Re: elliptical sentences

if I'm remembering correctly, under xorlo {lo} means something like "having something to do with", with no implications of actual existence, whether it is in the speakers mind only, or whether it _really is_ a specific instance of whatever it is that you're talking about.

Whereas {le} means that you have a specific thing in mind although I don't believe it makes any truth claims about whether or not it _really is_.  So "le gerku" would mean "I have an actual thing in mind that I'm calling 'dog' " while "lo gerku" would mean "there is something that I'm choosing to refer to as 'dog' ".

Did I get that right?  It's taken me forever to really get the hang of lo/le.

- Luke Bergen


On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:57 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
Oh dar God, what has 'lo' become now

From: Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 9:09:29 AM
Subject: [lojban] Re: elliptical sentences



On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
On Tuesday 28 July 2009 08:33:56 Michael Turniansky wrote:
>   Huh?  Am I missing something here?  What's elliptical about it?
>               --gejyspa

The complete statement would be "The genes for seeing red and green are on the
X chromosome; the gene for seeing blue is on the 7th chromosome". The gene
for seeing red isn't red, so calling it "lo xunre" isn't literally right. Do
I have to say at least "lo xunre co'e"?


   Ah, now I understand, and further understand why you mentioned "jgina" in your first message.  Taken completely out of context, I had no idea what the English sentence meant.  I thought you were just talking about abstract things...  well, let's see.. you could certainly get away with saying "le" rather than "lo" since even in xorlo there's no implication that it's actually colored that way.

            --gy



 




--0-1156200196-1248797775=:41523-- 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.