From lojban+bncCJbznvHdFRDj0qHlBBoEGQaeAQ@googlegroups.com Sun Oct 03 04:31:03 2010 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P2MmO-0004Y4-LH; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:31:03 -0700 Received: by wyb40 with SMTP id 40sf1122709wyb.16 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:50 -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:received:mime-version:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject: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=nRKgT4TJQFvUBik7LJ6Ct6l9x9IU0UA7YJkjzl9eskk=; b=52OUR3l50X6AAQ4Qj94gOcxthIP1uRta3FrVpxARfT98TSSIy+WKSZeeGLzJ4tVoap qIEPyzRVdXlGIJ8HE9ORm/ziLF1/5aRWDK1TR4hI1KUWbS81atXC0MUR675KkbGa+Nj1 eIH8ICQHAYFyjhyx/PBAUkmEObCcuGJbv5G1Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject: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=Fs/PSRfBxztul47emQ97drzGNr5XuMhhe6VL6T/nkRHtDTy3xgL+GYLJ2dNhkZ29jY 0mjeP86F0aro9gwq5fnbozBA0wyeDBcux8f8ldCBklWCJfJODJ93IBK8gv+rV3PIOp2t MdveEVpn112OP1dpihn+Q9dAFczTQ+EZ+9EdA= Received: by 10.216.145.135 with SMTP id p7mr1396994wej.26.1286105443385; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:43 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.92.203 with SMTP id s11ls1434664wbm.1.p; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.69.76 with SMTP id y12mr306559wbi.26.1286105441752; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.69.76 with SMTP id y12mr306558wbi.26.1286105441714; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f173.google.com (mail-wy0-f173.google.com [74.125.82.173]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id ey20si1578182wbb.6.2010.10.03.04.30.40; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:40 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.173; Received: by wyb39 with SMTP id 39so3954034wyb.32 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.23.129 with SMTP id v1mr4113811wev.49.1286105440541; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:30:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.8.144 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 04:30:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: MorphemeAddict Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 07:30:20 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] A pro-sumti for PU? To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lytlesw@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.173 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lytlesw@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=0016364c7111ed5c150491b4c104 --0016364c7111ed5c150491b4c104 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Would "nau" in selma'o CUhE work? [nau = reference point tense: refers to current space/time reference absolutely] stevo On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Latro wrote: > My first post on the big jboste .ui > > Frequently this equivalence is used: > caku mi broda == mi ca broda > and similar such things with PU. But {ku} isn't terminating anything > in LE, so this doesn't really make sense. At the same time we want to > be able to quickly say "now" or "later" without being constrained to > putting the tense before the selbri. The simplest way would be to > simply use {zo'e}, which is actually what I thought was going on with > {caku} and the lot. But this isn't especially precise; we should be > able to point at "the present moment" more easily and precisely, and > also be able to talk about it in terms of more than just tenses. > > So why not give it a pro-sumti? The first CV'V I could find was {ja'u} > (I was very surprised to find some of the CV'V that already exist; > {ga'o} is a prominent example); why not use that? > > > The short version of this: > Proposal: {ja'u}: pro-sumti; the present moment relative to the > speaker. > > > > > mu'o mi'e latros. > > -- > 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. --0016364c7111ed5c150491b4c104 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Would "nau" in selma&#= 39;o CUhE work?
[nau =3D reference point tense: = refers to current space/time reference absolutely]

stevo

On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Latro <blindbravado@gmail.c= om> wrote:
My first post on the big jboste = .ui

Frequently this equivalence is used:
caku mi broda =3D=3D mi = ca broda
and similar such things with PU. But {ku} isn't terminating anythingin LE, so this doesn't really make sense. At the same time we want to<= br>be able to quickly say "now" or "later" without bein= g constrained to
putting the tense before the selbri. The simplest way would be to
simply= use {zo'e}, which is actually what I thought was going on with
{cak= u} and the lot. But this isn't especially precise; we should be
able to point at "the present moment" more easily and precisely, = and
also be able to talk about it in terms of more than just tenses.
=
So why not give it a pro-sumti? The first CV'V I could find was {ja= 'u}
(I was very surprised to find some of the CV'V that already exist;
{= ga'o} is a prominent example); why not use that?


The short v= ersion of this:
Proposal: {ja'u}: pro-sumti; the present moment rela= tive to the
speaker.




mu'o mi'e latros.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the= Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send ema= il 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?h= l=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.
--0016364c7111ed5c150491b4c104--