From lukeabergen@gmail.com Mon Feb 22 13:36:08 2010 Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.212.53]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Njfwd-0002nO-K2 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:36:08 -0800 Received: by vws17 with SMTP id 17so88001vws.40 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:35:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=mQGedRfSB7GYq7p3S9PGPIXaAqUV1lFSLM5UwdEhqPI=; b=KwOMJ07CQokxjckNvkvFiUn/QqJGxjZpWklIaTKU+zREIDQ19E9bwP38I6l8fDvcjj xRFdtQ0kkq5nkOgJvC6O1nTMofFpuRe92yBfjDxMBvNExuc+O0X/sbjyNhw9l9QhZ5DY a8AzRADQ0HNnorxWRfCsAsAOztnqCdK/8I9tA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=sGpNL/6wc9Te9shUmsORJ2dp80cBlZZE0NvXWrLu218q6OA42yXmWLCodSvEJCUucm Rzb3ppppSk1jLhCjjFaLolX1xLqiY6cuqL69vzO9NNTiCF6eA/N7XDkn95v08W0yJsBN Q4Z3rLGxGVhFZR4o4fJTbV1sokzciu4ha+OOI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.58.69 with SMTP id f5mr2271215vch.201.1266874553243; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:35:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <5715b9301002221045h726fbcaeu36140fc1b3f3b4e0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:35:53 -0500 Message-ID: <5715b9301002221335t4f1c2c24n8c6f2388f5b90c33@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: before or after From: Luke Bergen To: lojban-list@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00235445bad6b8977404803737af --00235445bad6b8977404803737af Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Right, ok, that makes sense. But then you have things like BAhE that modify the following word. Or our friends of SE. Is there a table somewhere of which selma'o modify the preceding word vs the following word? On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Dag Odenhall wrote: > UI describe the preceding word, or the grammatical scope of that > structure. {pe'a mi donri} is all figurative: the scope is the scope > of the invisible {i}. {mi donri pe'a} scopes to {donri} and {la pe'a > donri cu donri} scopes {la donri} as would {la donri ku pe'a}. {pe'a} > also has a rafsi, which can't end a lujvo due to ending in a > consonant: {mi pevdo'i} probably means the same as {mi donri pe'a}. > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Luke Bergen > wrote: > > I could swear that I've seen people use {pe'a} to say that the following > > word is figurative but I see in chapter 13 of The Book that it actually > > marks the previous word as figurative. This has come back to bite me a > > couple of times before with other words. Is there some good general rule > to > > make it easier to remember when something modifies the following word vs > the > > previous word? Are all of the selma'o at least consistent within > > themselves? (i.e. if one UI* marks the previous word do ALL UI* mark the > > previous word?) > > ki'e mi'e pafcribe > > > 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. > > --00235445bad6b8977404803737af Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Right, ok, that makes sense. =A0But then you have things like BAhE that mod= ify the following word. =A0Or our friends of SE. =A0Is there a table somewh= ere of which selma'o modify the preceding word vs the following word?
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Dag Odenhall <dag.odenhall@= gmail.com> wrote:
UI describe the preceding word, or the grammatical scope of that
structure. {pe'a mi donri} is all figurative: the scope is the scope of the invisible {i}. {mi donri pe'a} scopes to {donri} and {la pe'= a
donri cu donri} scopes {la donri} as would {la donri ku pe'a}. {pe'= a}
also has a rafsi, which can't end a lujvo due to ending in a
consonant: {mi pevdo'i} probably means the same as {mi donri pe'a}.=

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> I could swear that I've seen people use {pe'a} to say that the= following
> word is figurative but I see in chapter 13 of The Book that it actuall= y
> marks the previous=A0word as figurative. =A0This has come back to bite= me a
> couple of times before with other words. =A0Is there some good general= rule to
> make it easier to remember when something modifies the following word = vs the
> previous word? =A0Are all of the selma'o at least consistent withi= n
> themselves? =A0(i.e. if one UI* marks the previous word do ALL UI* mar= k the
> previous word?)
> =A0ki'e mi'e pafcribe


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.


--00235445bad6b8977404803737af--