From lojban+bncCOzcnrWBFBD92__fBBoEca1gdQ@googlegroups.com Fri May 28 09:23:45 2010 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OI2LT-0000Oh-O4; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:45 -0700 Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5sf1292197gyd.16 for ; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:31 -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: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=ZSxkqYxV/KHZPfnWXnNRevE6jfimWcQjnu+vedMs4Mw=; b=dk0czcqsSUsE6UEosEFbX5wFSjHiAU/mFcfIUOk7LugiONTG0BYUTvSoU7h9K/1MXu xA76w7+svmfrch7ZLPWX4vWrvJ81IESiGsXjr62niTthcExspYn7YTRb3n8gz8RD6RTz kCcm4eWtx/KCBtkgfHcnOH+oGRBR4zjOl0pdo= 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=oRT2ZpimWJY9c5Ze1SdN32EIONIJ6TZRh/p9R6DdVwYcNo9+z20ehAVO/YMmu7piQg zbjYxmf/2OGJlsfDap8gjCMf+nLco9KB0Pi5bF9ZwuvFzD04fYTtaE9ioSJioNc0A15C aU5ZMGiaC9vvCuo5yrCuydN61V//IhDbaGfho= Received: by 10.101.131.32 with SMTP id i32mr26663ann.70.1275063805617; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:25 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.148.2 with SMTP id a2ls694968ano.1.p; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.144.29 with SMTP id w29mr142257ann.58.1275063804818; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.144.29 with SMTP id w29mr142256ann.58.1275063804771; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f180.google.com (mail-gy0-f180.google.com [209.85.160.180]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id g8si1987954anb.2.2010.05.28.09.23.23; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:23 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of pascal.akihiko@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.180 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.180; Received: by mail-gy0-f180.google.com with SMTP id 13so1162089gyb.39 for ; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.59.12 with SMTP id j12mr333150qah.94.1275063803406; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:23 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.141.8 with HTTP; Fri, 28 May 2010 09:23:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <3414c7b0-2a75-4cb2-99a4-0afa6458f6ba@t34g2000prd.googlegroups.com> <7ac5ef76-747a-4077-ac8d-bd45e0c68005@y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 17:23:23 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Named multiples 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 209.85.160.180 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=00c09fa21d9b116ab80487a9ed9f --00c09fa21d9b116ab80487a9ed9f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 27 May 2010 23:06, Lindar wrote: > The ONLY thing that ends in a consonant is a name, and so names become > easy to pick out due to the fact that we rarely use them in > conversation, and they sound nothing like the rest of the language. {la cribe} is a name (cmene) too, and it sounds like {lo cribe}. The word class that ends with a consonant is cmevla. And this class has experimental usages for other than what we usually consider names. {sa'ei}, for instance, marks a cmevla as onomatopoeia. > On > that mental parse tree, if we used "xorla", I would now have to stop > and question every single cmevla to check whether or not it's being > used as a selbri. > (a) lo me la spagetis (b) lo spagetis With (a), you analyse {spagetis}'s relation to {la} to {me} to {lo}, resulting in the interpretation "that which is called {spagetis}". With (b), you analyse {spagetis}'s relation to {lo}, resulting in the interpretation "that which is called {spagetis}". In either case, you 'check' the syntax of {... spagetis}. Which syntax is simpler? In which case do you have to 'stop and question' less? (b). That's one thing the proposal would achieve. -- 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. --00c09fa21d9b116ab80487a9ed9f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 27 May 2010 23:06, Lindar &= lt;lindarthebard@yahoo.com&g= t; wrote:
The ONLY thing that ends in a consonant is a name, and so names become
easy to pick out due to the fact that we rarely use them in
conversation, and they sound nothing like the rest of the language.

{la cribe} is a name (cmene) too, and it sounds like {lo crib= e}.

The word class that ends with a consonant is cmevla. And this cl= ass has experimental usages for other than what we usually consider names. = {sa'ei}, for instance, marks a cmevla as onomatopoeia.

=A0
On<= br> that mental parse tree, if we used "xorla", I would now have to s= top
and question every single cmevla to check whether or not it's being
used as a selbri.

=A0(a) lo me la spagetis
=A0(= b) lo spagetis

With (a), you analyse {spagetis}'s relation to {l= a} to {me} to {lo}, resulting in the interpretation "that which is cal= led {spagetis}".
With (b), you analyse {spagetis}'s relation to {lo}, resulting in the i= nterpretation "that which is called {spagetis}".

In either= case, you 'check' the syntax of {... spagetis}. Which syntax is si= mpler? In which case do you have to 'stop and question' less? (b). = That's one thing the proposal would achieve.