From lojban+bncCK7Yk5CUCxDD4vvlBBoEIWTsxQ@googlegroups.com Wed Oct 20 06:40:34 2010 Received: from mail-vw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.212.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P8Yu7-0005pU-Cl; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:34 -0700 Received: by vws4 with SMTP id 4sf1724151vws.16 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:25 -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=qQg3Z55J9zDr0N+yguHhJrxVlNCrAND+5Trv53R3MU0=; b=fiDah4EZIRihwv7vE49LfcynkVlUEZk21s9WXFJxc29IsARsrAdHzwI4RHL8m7/q0z ckeJs336Degh7gIaRDvfPUmbSQaVjvN5X+OplvHfCtspdyadOVLty7ORkL2bIWLBxH72 9hE3atz/wYcunDWkBZxnXatlXMi7b1y59SheQ= 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=FeGvcM5gbwHANdqPGbAAP7ZZaUNWXfeoyqWsyNc7tmowzPd3MNZXNHWMSAP94JHgrA 3ZjRgGUMmS4k0J0hzMWT5NfvvDU93oC9sZFkNJ3z04Zmr0ddoeyru7MkBYwycQ81c1S2 CRddlW2b07S/3bspPVOsu9H/2WLOqxu62gjfc= Received: by 10.220.191.66 with SMTP id dl2mr80188vcb.28.1287582019234; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:19 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.220.188.5 with SMTP id cy5ls270447vcb.5.p; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.177.65 with SMTP id bh1mr643679vcb.14.1287582018337; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.177.65 with SMTP id bh1mr643678vcb.14.1287582018323; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f178.google.com (mail-qy0-f178.google.com [209.85.216.178]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id a11si25989vci.7.2010.10.20.06.40.17; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rdentato@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.178; Received: by qyk35 with SMTP id 35so2833129qyk.16 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.215.199 with SMTP id hf7mr6606688qab.269.1287582008375; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.189.67 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:40:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:40:08 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] despite ... From: Remo Dentato To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: rdentato@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rdentato@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.178 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rdentato@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 2010/10/20 Jorge Llamb=EDas : > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Remo Dentato wrote: >> What would be the best way to translate "despite" in a sentence like: >> >> "I like you despite your bad behavior" >> >> I used {gu mi nelci do gi do maljikca} > > I never remember whether in "gu X gi Y" it is X or Y whose truth value > is irrelevant to the truth value of the whole. I'd like to think it's > X, because it is the one next to the "u", but I have the nagging > suspicion that it may be defined the other way in CLL. In fact in the CLL {gu X gi Y} is reported as: "X is true, wheter or not Y" I agree that this is not exactly as "despite". It should be more like "regadless". "despite" has the implication that I *know* that you misbheave but I still like you. "regardless" does not say anything about your behavior. >> Using modals seems to more like saying "it's not because you misbheave >> that I like you". > > That's how I would analyze it to. > > "to'e mu'i nai": "I like you not prevented/demotivated by your misbehavio= ur" Let me see if I understand. {to'e mu'i nai} is to be grouped as {(to'e mu'i) nai} {mu'i} is for "motivated by" {to'e mu'i} is for "demotived by" {to'e mu'i nai} is for "not demotived by" Correct? > The problem is that, in Lojban tradition, "mu'i nai" itself has been > analyzed as what should have been "to'e mu'i nai", so you will find it > widely used that way. I see. But I thing that just {mu'i nai} would generate confusion, I'll use {to'e mu'i nai}. Thanks 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.