From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCx4cLfBBoE_JNYZA@googlegroups.com Sun May 16 19:58:14 2010 Received: from mail-yw0-f165.google.com ([209.85.211.165]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ODqWu-0003zF-Sm; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:58:13 -0700 Received: by ywh37 with SMTP id 37sf3961527ywh.2 for ; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:58:02 -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=UtZ6xDkaXPPDIZkQaW3lOaIA8lgC5KA3dIW5Y5Xh/lM=; b=C0RhfRPvgmARII4n2hIPHLp9MHXN5Qa0Gbj3lA/ukne5NTUSDdkZGWNhYvVpMZqIPv dJNUXw/drozevpudQgntbQWE3mWM30/yjkOcI23+Iq2LMZr90+oHkJZzjva1RJddMEIC tXcywZpTwpHyv1uL5QpuSJgyXqwE/8KO+dB6s= 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=qGxJv1HcqEdeIQXBQjsLgixPTagZZl9HBsFmwHt1Po5n6+sSQ17BtiFaqekyWonFuu VV2KZF0y7wgQSHn6ZvBdGH1TK53JWwlkDR1mZ+WuKyVDJ8g0JUUsYcheaoeVcQXzVuKV 3WyKVlvcdQYnhZppg7qrzy0q2kcsGk0q0hxI0= Received: by 10.101.180.37 with SMTP id h37mr172368anp.4.1274065073996; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:53 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.177.32 with SMTP id e32ls2284148anp.5.p; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.4.9 with SMTP id g9mr1347797ani.23.1274065073211; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.4.9 with SMTP id g9mr1347796ani.23.1274065073141; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f178.google.com (mail-qy0-f178.google.com [209.85.221.178]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id a39si6422353ybd.3.2010.05.16.19.57.52; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.221.178; Received: by mail-qy0-f178.google.com with SMTP id 8so6088179qyk.4 for ; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.242.65 with SMTP id lh1mr145320qcb.151.1274065071890; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.82.11 with HTTP; Sun, 16 May 2010 19:57:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 23:57:51 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Attitudinal scales and the meaning of {cu'i} From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.178 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 7:46 PM, tijlan wrote: > > In a case where "za'u re'u" means "za'u so re'u" for example, "za'u re'u" means "za'u pa re'u". There is no case in which it means "za'u so re'u", although in some case "za'u so re'u" could be true at the same time. > I thought "tu'o" was more like "zo'e" than "zi'o". See: http://jbotcan.org/docs/cll/c18/s14.html > "tu'o"s definition: > non-specific/elliptical number. This doesn't necessarily mean a non-existing > value, does it? The full "deffinition" is: "digit/number: null operand (used in unary operations); a non-specific/elliptical number." So, yes, if you ignore the "null operand" part, it could be a non-specific number. That's the kind of thing the BPFK is meant to settle. >Does "pa so so tu'o" mean "199[no number]" or > "199[unspecific number]"? I think the latter. Hence "1990s", in my opinion. I've seen it used like that, yes. But the 1990s is a whole decade, while "199[some digit]" would be a single year, no? And if tu'o is a non-specific number, why should it be used as a non-specific digit? Things like "pa so so tu'o" to name a decade are better examples of non-compositional lexicalization than the fully compositional "za'u re'u". mu'o mi'e xorxes -- 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.