From lojban+bncCNf8pM-bDBCAybbmBBoEtA7cvg@googlegroups.com Sun Oct 31 10:17:12 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCbWe-0005rC-H3; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:17:11 -0700 Received: by wwb34 with SMTP id 34sf2845634wwb.16 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:16:54 -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:received-spf:received:mime-version:received :sender: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 :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=dP5FFFDwgyoWXNzgpCwkkVZyiW6tkjruqnlrge3YihY=; b=HQ7FdepGMmjb+9Y1rm3djqAJDwY/U1i55FWzeStfRbORmxA65AiTsqEMnkeaW6b5nB w6JVFejxt53RXw5uW7lxozt6npslB/368XUw94mLDp1p/34CM2pEPeCtG+ROfPaIK7S3 PZIrnVtpfZxCTY6zkeGumvzZ763IiRZqP9HbA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender: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:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=66CBm1tsgU8vppsODduCekhGhyQYviBiK1TcWAMeDjLpMzvt2LhCUbtJLed8vSqtfd Yyaux/XJpu3B+wM//ga0aSuQbrUW6v7OEG8gAPLW2yzbqz3EhbUCFoKPWvm3hkXs+Rez xnirse4l6Sp/vpjXBv+U4ef41ngmhmK6Hn60M= Received: by 10.216.236.90 with SMTP id v68mr2074637weq.7.1288545408283; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:16:48 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.5.203 with SMTP id 53ls1950572wel.3.p; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.173.67 with SMTP id u45mr769146wel.7.1288545407116; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 10:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.116.65 with SMTP id l1mr457536faq.28.1288537089931; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.116.65 with SMTP id l1mr457535faq.28.1288537089919; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f49.google.com (mail-fx0-f49.google.com [209.85.161.49]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id l25si1229269fam.0.2010.10.31.07.58.08; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.49 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.49; Received: by fxm11 with SMTP id 11so3224911fxm.8 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:58:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.185.9 with SMTP id a9mr3180065hbh.199.1288537088501; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.239.161.20 with HTTP; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:58:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <995110.82874.qm@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 14:58:08 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: mi kakne lo bajra From: tijlan To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: paskios@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.49 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=paskios@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: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 31 October 2010 12:47, Lindar wrote: > For the record, I have > explained that the reason it's wrong is because the meaning cannot > change based on context. When {djica} means "wants" in some contexts > and "wants to have" in others, that is bad. I see no significant change in the predicate's meaning. In both {mi djica lo plise} and {mi djica lo nu ponse lo plise}, the meaning of {dunda} remains "want something". Both {lo plise} and {lo nu ponse lo plise} are something. > Consistency is important. If {djica lo plise} > means "Want to have an apple." then what does {djica lo nu bajra} > mean? {djica lo plise} doesn't mean "want to have an apple"; it means "want ". "to have" is not a prescriptive element. {djica lo nu bajra} means "want ". The definition of {djica} is identical to the other example. Both {lo plise} and {lo nu bajra} are a valid djica2, in my opinion. -- 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.