From lojban+bncCIycn8S8DhDFxrLfBBoEkWE08Q@googlegroups.com Thu May 13 18:11:53 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OCjRM-0002ip-3v; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:53 -0700 Received: by pwj6 with SMTP id 6sf192836pwj.16 for ; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:42 -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-spf:received:mime-version:received: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 :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=Wnd4PdHugZY99zZ+ZuepDKY06Ye75BlrnYIlq7PGFZM=; b=U4K3UU/BuW1IlUZUsDAeVszE9pXCtNWFeuvzhVDsBUAj/cTDlthjjMuilBjodybOU7 lmnt/wQWRxuoV/comEknSUY7ct065C+37bxzbQ9NvwUpjmPH2VBXzcYhJXOvBbzLoprQ KDxLVMoJQ+G6Qt89QG/8GxWd1CVIon07szgH4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version: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:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=EZMk7LFTh7mX/TilFBYti/CAnbwdTbYisuNd7/a+DLh4UkSvfQ5bnCBI96/X94rdLc 4enwoupUUsIMrCRaLPJ0WiIFnEOOZse92VORRnn7fXiN/LkET52pfTqRRgfTthLlmRNR KErlp5A/CSrdRkxUvN/Ec/iMhbZ2takcIwf2A= Received: by 10.115.66.9 with SMTP id t9mr108908wak.4.1273799493767; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:33 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.115.135.31 with SMTP id m31ls1112705wan.1.p; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.117.32 with SMTP id u32mr229005wam.32.1273799492162; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.117.32 with SMTP id u32mr229004wam.32.1273799492127; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f41.google.com (mail-vw0-f41.google.com [209.85.212.41]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id e19si2710316wam.0.2010.05.13.18.11.30; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.41 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.41; Received: by mail-vw0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 7so1740169vws.14 for ; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.234.68 with SMTP id kb4mr202182qcb.103.1273799490600; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.225.66 with HTTP; Thu, 13 May 2010 18:11:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 21:11:30 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Attitudinal scales and the meaning of {cu'i} From: Michael Turniansky To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.41 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mturniansky@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: mturniansky@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364edbe026ffff0486838ecd --0016364edbe026ffff0486838ecd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2010/5/13 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Michael Turniansky > wrote: > > > > I'm quite willing to say that [na]cu'i/ru'e/sai/cai are context > dependent, > > in the same way that "jai" or "bo" do different things in different > > contexts. > > Not quite in the same way though. BO and JAI are purely structural, > they add no meaning of their own, they only add structure to a text. > On the other hand, selma'o CAI is purely semantic, not structural. > > (I understand why you might say that BO has more than one function, > but why JAI? It always does the same thing: it changes the argument > structure of the selbri by removing the x1 from first position and > replacing it with a non-core argument.) > > I don't know, it always seems to me like JAI BAI and JAI SELBRI don't really function in quite the same way, meaningwise. (And what exactly does JAI PU do? Does anyone use it? Examples?) > > Some things are > > already in common use, for example za'u roi > > Why is "more than once" not compositional? > > If you mean "za'u re'u", "a time after the first one", it also seems > compositional to me. > > I did mean that, yes, > > This is probably heresy, though... > > Nothing wrong with heresy, as long as you don't mind the heat. It can > get hot at those stakes. :) > > u'i --gejyspa --=20 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. --0016364edbe026ffff0486838ecd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2010/5/13 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com&g= t;
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturniansky@gmail.com> = wrote:
>
> I'm quite willing to say that [na]cu'i/ru'e/sai/cai are co= ntext dependent,
> in the same way that "jai" or "bo" do different th= ings in different
> contexts.

Not quite in the same way though. BO and JAI are purely structural, they add no meaning of their own, they only add structure to a text.
On the other hand, selma'o CAI is purely semantic, not structural.

(I understand why you might say that BO has more than one function,
but why JAI? It always does the same thing: it changes the argument
structure of the selbri by removing the x1 from first position and
replacing it with a non-core argument.)

I don't know, it always s= eems to me like JAI BAI and JAI SELBRI don't really function in quite t= he same way, meaningwise.=A0 (And what exactly does JAI PU do?=A0 Does anyo= ne use it?=A0 Examples?)


> Some things are
> already in common use, for example za'u roi

Why is "more than once" not compositional?

If you mean "za'u re'u", "a time after the first one= ", it also seems
compositional to me.

=A0=A0 I did mean that, yes,<= br>

=A0
> =A0 This is probably heresy, though...

Nothing wrong with heresy, as long as you don't mind the heat. It= can
get hot at those stakes. :)


=A0u'i
=A0= =A0 =A0 --gejyspa
=A0

--
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.
--0016364edbe026ffff0486838ecd--