From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDX-aHlBBoEzERhkg@googlegroups.com Sun Oct 03 05:53:58 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P2O4h-0005Mg-OM; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:58 -0700 Received: by wwe15 with SMTP id 15sf1132797wwe.16 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:49 -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=utQFluxOTkAp0ng82+VaXIFq2gmOY7UVRQMZVwEoxRw=; b=37OF3UTJyCV2eyBI6cABHwL1Wfpu0DNKBDFZbKq5VnFg8DRaYfGcsvQP9mLMc48MAk gI7rhIZz/Vj1S1WCjf9oabPavvj4Aq9Cy3sR7jEkGUUlT4WjJfBS6huU14dZ9ziBtqc9 7GnfCslDPoc89pZIWfkk3YnmbSjvxXkZXL7y0= 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=H8WFJdC/A+eXOCM5h+XaZy3opdtV0BQA3OpFNspjodmOjFW1LyuDNg2YZVldPYk9yi rhqzXHw4OS+D6MvUteyzoFe/+SbIatZuCJSbD7zvdKl5S3P9PAIIZ77mz93DI6nLOnIv AXgTWGGhbkbxBFGa1zIAGuuEVaAaIn3adQcIM= Received: by 10.216.145.130 with SMTP id p2mr1483825wej.7.1286110423503; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:43 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.139.159 with SMTP id e31ls1444078wbu.0.p; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.158.11 with SMTP id d11mr309746wbx.29.1286110422530; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.158.11 with SMTP id d11mr309745wbx.29.1286110422506; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id x33si1632791wbs.1.2010.10.03.05.53.41; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.181; Received: by wyf28 with SMTP id 28so6128622wyf.40 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.155.143 with SMTP id s15mr6590373wbw.154.1286110420399; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.145.130 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 05:53:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 09:53:40 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] A pro-sumti for PU? From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 9:17 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. They are basically equivalent, yes, at least in such simple cases. You have to be careful when you move it over negations, quantifiers, etc. > But {ku} isn't terminating anything > in LE, so this doesn't really make sense. KU has two distinct uses in the grammar: term -> (tag | FA) [KU] | NA KU and: sumti -> (LA | LE | quantifier) selbri [KU] this may be seen as overloading, but that's how it's always beeen. (Notice that the KU after NA is not elidable.) So KU does not just terminate LE. It can also terminate LA or quantifier plus selbri (which is similar to terminating LE, since the result is a sumti, or it can make a term out of a tag or NA (or FA, which is weird but grammatical). > 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. If you mean "ca zo'e", yes, it's semantically pretty much equivalent to "ca ku", but syntactically that is not what's going on. "ca zo'e" does not have any omitted terminator. > 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. The tense for "here-and-now" is "nau". Talking about the present is different form situating some event in the present. For talking about the present you would have to use "lo cabna", or maybe "lo cabna be dei" for more precision. That's something you can use to fill an argument slot, and so you can say something about it. > 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. Example sentence? 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.