From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCup6PlBBoEdUdA4w@googlegroups.com Sun Oct 03 12:04:33 2010 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P2TrH-0005wJ-CK; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:33 -0700 Received: by wyb40 with SMTP id 40sf1182630wyb.16 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:21 -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=gzwyD+zW7+O/uo6cSOuB4c/pePPaJ0TZqs0/upweqso=; b=ajsOSNQxHcCDzcRfRveqs1JvOZ/EpLrQVGX/0CreiD9SVieOjyzJ/4isPCx6oG8rN0 Ebxig/XIDPO6k98TLQ1KNkPWVN6vph5aMTjYopkE4ga+aR71v6neeRH031o0gOcb030M iuilkP49u68gHJAZ7Ifg1W1qSNOECIbsT9/Dg= 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=toSmlVD/nTtBBH2VSi6SFIzqvheSMYQtZgS1ftTcdx8uaWxTySV4wjkzkA+qli0q0F YfmH9H32/zWV11loBVungSxqQIfVz1q4FQMoLT1Phv7VtbklwRKGdlHmN3w9SAL2NKny S928zmDKlUZ65edEQ1m7cfiiqSkFsBSD0/sN8= Received: by 10.216.145.135 with SMTP id p7mr1431835wej.26.1286132654176; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:14 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.39.10 with SMTP id d10ls1493565wbe.2.p; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.137.80 with SMTP id v16mr322055wbt.20.1286132652895; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.137.80 with SMTP id v16mr322054wbt.20.1286132652874; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id a37si1797562wba.7.2010.10.03.12.04.11; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.182 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.182; Received: by wyb29 with SMTP id 29so3459598wyb.13 for ; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.147.79 with SMTP id k15mr6908962wbv.128.1286132651153; Sun, 03 Oct 2010 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.145.130 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2010 16:04:11 -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 74.125.82.182 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 Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Ian Johnson wrote: > That still doesn't explain why {ku} is used instead of {zo'e}, only that it > can be used in that way. I don't really understand why that is helpful, > linguistically, though I understand that it isn't going anywhere. Well, "ku" is a bit shorter than "zo'e", and sometimes can be elided. Neither is a very convincing reason, but I can't think of any other at the moment. > How do I say something equivalent to this, > preferably with the same kind of extensibility, or can I not do so?: I doubt that you cannot say something in Lojban that you can say in English (or vice versa for that matter). The only issue might be how longwinded you need to make it, but not whether you can say it or not. > I went to my house. Define the time at which I did this to be A. Before A, I > left the store. Define the time at which I did this to be B. Before A but > after B I went to my friend's house. mi klama lo zdani be mi ca .abu .i pu .abu mi cliva lo zarci ca by .i ge pu .abu gi ku'i ba by mi klama lo zdani be lo pendo > Thus unambigously establishing the sequence: > I left the store. Then I went to my friend's house. Then I went to my house. > without actually needing to come up with the events in the sequence in the > order that they occurred. Granted, the idiomatic way to say this in English > in this order would be: > I went to my house. Before I went to my house, I left the store. Before I > went to my house but after I left the store, I went to my friend's house. > but we have {goi} to avoid this kind of thing already. The idiomatic way to say it would be to tell the story in the right order: X and then Y and then Z. If you somehow need to insert something that you forgot to say, it will take some effort, in any language. 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.