From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCNgqLlBBoEJjf2mQ@googlegroups.com Sun Oct 03 06:11:56 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P2OM5-0006Ma-Sg; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:56 -0700 Received: by wwe15 with SMTP id 15sf1134923wwe.16 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:47 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bGsSl3k0Fw1Sn2nGTZYV1zMdZ6xgjuUmuYt2Os6f4Ic=; b=MUSea473JtlJAZ6kffzrfrZITSQ3MCnro7b7eYovFRRYPSZBEa05Pk2gPurmL+RpgE XDa2BophY0Uvp11pU5b49nJbshJnvB/Al0NieB9oCgvLSE0XAhEzOGaPMY51f9T8YMzu ZIq9KI1mEbP61JQPCvJLnb1G0L1EJwNgg5hdA= 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:content-transfer-encoding; b=PLVlSU02MUwwr9rGO18D4nLz2Aj+5mE1c/8TmQyX4TTk39HNlXuJtqrpcC83Mj8lLg xl5XWhvzK+rKZYV1wBghCjI5qSqixE+OFCcDm96cqmxU6jaArpLC7rpIHN4/8s6knYhF 6HWrGLcUdCAZXn3cwTQX/gT32tG5dK/oBM/HI= Received: by 10.216.144.38 with SMTP id m38mr1416495wej.14.1286111501516; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:41 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.39.10 with SMTP id d10ls1445328wbe.2.p; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.148.4 with SMTP id n4mr309046wbv.0.1286111500534; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.148.4 with SMTP id n4mr309045wbv.0.1286111500509; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f171.google.com (mail-wy0-f171.google.com [74.125.82.171]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q13si1642222wbs.4.2010.10.03.06.11.39; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.171 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.171; Received: by wyf19 with SMTP id 19so4557446wyf.30 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.142.208 with SMTP id r16mr6729966wbu.140.1286111499286; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.145.130 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 06:11:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 10:11:39 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Omission of "Subjects" 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 74.125.82.171 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 4:46 AM, H. Felton wrote: > > __Know_that_Lojban_bridi_without_x1_place_have_been_described_ > _as_observatives__, but __wondering_if_omitting__x1_is_really_ > _different_from_omitting_other_places__. I don't think there's any difference. >=A0If not, then is there > any problem with using Lojban analogues of structure of > "underlined" phrases because __considering_doing_so__. No problem at all, and it's done quite frequently. >=A0__Seems_ > _like_good_application_of_being_permitted_to_omit_unneeded_ > _information__,_such_as_already_encouraged_for_tense_and_number__. Indeed. You have to be careful not to overdo it though. I think in general tense and number can be more easily left to context than the x1 value, but it's hard to come up with any strict rules about when the x1 can be safely omitted and when not. I guess some kind of rules will arise from trial and error. > __Know_that_Lojban_is_not_compression_system__. =A0 __Actually_ > _have_preference_for_"lo_broda_pe_mi"_over_"lo_mi_broda"__. > __Seems_less_like_attempt_to_force_English-like_aspect_on_to_ > _Lojban__, also __not_unfamiliar_to_me__: __remember_use_of_ > _"de"_for_possession_from_long-ago_high-school_Spanish_ > _classes__. =A0So some "compressions" will not personally use. I don't mind "lo KOhA broda", but with sumti other than KOhA I find it almost unreadable because of the duplicated gadri. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 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.