From lojban+bncCOzcnrWBFBD2hc7eBBoE8SvBTw@googlegroups.com Sat Apr 24 16:47:28 2010 Received: from mail-qy0-f166.google.com ([209.85.221.166]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1O5p4H-0004De-8I; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:47:28 -0700 Received: by qyk38 with SMTP id 38sf26219783qyk.1 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:47:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received :sender:received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=VRiqfJ/hh/22vLntqp10y5oIt08cdIiW0RfYDp+PKHc=; b=M1cMLwKZ84oyvSar308QmhEYCgumPzJZH5Y1LK4vHI9iJ3A1FXLKlqIMJqRv4JOq+e Vsye3THoo4V4rdkveV6PBOXXwUdQRfJZyS9YKy3lS7Cji9j79ieWhIPNyjZaZVZjXb7h 6eYWqXPSCnCmkSO7ng6Ekg55KhT4/JWozAP/w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; b=FXCiWdPh9TKnh7qXY6JOGU7Dk+ohjOe+ifLQFQN/X4aBMzsO3wNulVlfAAielTh+7v +R7aBsN8tSTbB5en9YaOjSJlxufGGOvs1kwBUJnWSKfC1vRU02MDicO5Ex4UoX5OH6gz B/6fg6K9M9XM3R0J7HPAAxerendXpO/wu5pyA= Received: by 10.224.97.221 with SMTP id m29mr177857qan.31.1272152822508; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:47:02 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.224.86.223 with SMTP id t31ls1689260qal.7.p; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.58.97 with SMTP id f33mr178592qah.3.1272152821044; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:47:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.96.196 with SMTP id i4mr462768vcn.6.1272151653046; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:27:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.96.196 with SMTP id i4mr462767vcn.6.1272151652977; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:27:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f200.google.com (mail-qy0-f200.google.com [209.85.221.200]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id b14si1843215vcx.1.2010.04.24.16.27.31; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pascal.akihiko@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.200 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.221.200; Received: by qyk38 with SMTP id 38so10984587qyk.5 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:27:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.218.147 with SMTP id hq19mr2436744qcb.34.1272151651182; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.111.102 with HTTP; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:27:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 00:27:31 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Explicit non-restriction From: tijlan To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of pascal.akihiko@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.200 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=pascal.akihiko@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: pascal.akihiko@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163630f16544eaad048503e37e --00163630f16544eaad048503e37e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 24 April 2010 17:35, Daniel Brockman wrote: > >> If you say {.i do nelci ma}, most people will assume that > >> you've left out some implicit {poi broda} on {ma}. > > > > Why? "ma" usually means "what?", not "which?". > > > > Without any more context, I would read "do nelci ma" as "what do you > like?". > > Yeah, which sounds strange in English too. The proper response > to that question is "what do you mean?" > > You have to say something like "out of all things, what do you like?" > Is {do nelci ma} not already explicitly non-restrictive? This {ma} explicitly lacks restrictive elements. So maybe {.i do nelci ma poi me ro da}? But that sounds weird. > Wouldn't that actually be more restrictive, as the answer is expected not to be other than the same as {ro da} i.e. not to be {zo'e poi na'e me ro da}? What if the answer is {no da}? Maybe {do nelci ma bi'u} is a good way! > There is {e'inai} too. mu'o mi'e tijlan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --00163630f16544eaad048503e37e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--00163630f16544eaad048503e37e--