From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBDc_f_iBBoEiqLMIA@googlegroups.com Mon Aug 09 06:13:23 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OiSAI-0006mn-Ox; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:13:23 -0700 Received: by gxk22 with SMTP id 22sf22391181gxk.16 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:13:12 -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-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=sv01SdOS/nt0Og0DeAkEEqjzbYZiqyoxetyY4G6PnUc=; b=oWP7MaYD36qPBPU//kFvSEAjKf1gpuTSsDE2HQROZvtngGR10CrhhbFWpLtOePoGO4 ajc/ffKEt/Tqgw6EOrKAZjDJzFB+zb6nvZGfxBmQpCDnAYWCuEBX8T6GQljHKRVuNDFV drQbKYY/iscyGKpg1V8GkKof2oWlP41Y+enHM= 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-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=kt5HJ5vQJ4ij4hijQWm7QKmQ91jLXYNHckzBTOcgqXVqexPOAl7YN57XrmKFR+rd6U 3ZWqnMSrQ+MiNmHs/z52ah3qeaueNQohnna7Bwxa68Ot/2atm8sESxiYPambgwLIkmbT zDHhSe/EV09jwZ2Nptixe4toff63nWNOVCW/4= Received: by 10.100.29.32 with SMTP id c32mr1650495anc.37.1281359580705; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:13:00 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.208.33 with SMTP id k33ls2101429anq.0.p; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.172.33 with SMTP id z33mr9881040ano.34.1281359580094; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.172.33 with SMTP id z33mr9881039ano.34.1281359580044; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-f51.google.com (mail-yw0-f51.google.com [209.85.213.51]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q14si4171263anq.4.2010.08.09.06.12.59; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.51; Received: by ywa6 with SMTP id 6so5384738ywa.10 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:12:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.101.28.11 with SMTP id f11mr17834174anj.264.1281359578816; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 06:12:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.123.96 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 06:12:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C5FF69A.4050300@perpetuum-immobile.de> References: <4C5FF69A.4050300@perpetuum-immobile.de> Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 09:12:58 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Illogical English Sign From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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=001636b2b1238682ba048d63c6ad --001636b2b1238682ba048d63c6ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I get what you're saying. I'm gonna go back and read the CLL again. Clearly it is time for a re-read. co'o On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Timo Paulssen < timonator@perpetuum-immobile.de> wrote: > On 08/06/2010 09:09 PM, Luke Bergen wrote: > > ok, so forgetting the fatci bit, you're saying that these two > > following bridi are different? > > > > 1) mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i > > 2) mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i makau > > > > I read {lo du'u do tolmo'i} as {lo du'u do tolmo'i zo'e} and the way > > I understand {zo'e} is that it can be anything (including makau). So > > I see 2 as being a more specific version of 1. Am I wrong here? > > This totally goes against my understanding of kau. In my opinion, zo'e > can never be "ma kau", because kau alters the basic semantic structure > of the sentence to such an extent that no other simple sumti could. > > {mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i } == I can't forget, that > it is true, that you forgot. > {mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i ma kau} == I can't forget, > what it was, that you forgot. > > mu'o mi'e la timos noi se cfipu > > -- > 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. > > -- 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. --001636b2b1238682ba048d63c6ad Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I get what you're saying. =A0I'm gonna go back and read the CLL aga= in. =A0Clearly it is time for a re-read. =A0co'o

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Timo Paulssen <timonator@perpetuum= -immobile.de> wrote:
On 08/06/2010 09:09 PM, L= uke Bergen wrote:
> ok, so forgetting the fatci bit, you're saying that these two
> following bridi are different?
>
> 1) =A0mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i
> 2) =A0mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i makau >
> I read {lo du'u do tolmo'i} as {lo du'u do tolmo'i zo&= #39;e} and the way
> I understand {zo'e} is that it can be anything (including makau). = =A0So
> I see 2 as being a more specific version of 1. =A0Am I wrong here?

This totally goes against my understanding of kau. In my opinion, zo&= #39;e
can never be "ma kau", because kau alters the basic semantic stru= cture
of the sentence to such an extent that no other simple sumti could.

{mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i } =3D=3D I can= 9;t forget, that
it is true, that you forgot.
{mi na kakne lo nu tolmo'i lo du'u do tolmo'i ma kau} =3D=3D I = can't forget,
what it was, that you forgot.

mu'o mi'e la timos noi se cfipu

--
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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.


--
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.
--001636b2b1238682ba048d63c6ad--