From lojban+bncCML0xpmUARC8jc_nBBoEN7veQg@googlegroups.com Mon Nov 29 07:29:15 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PN5fB-0002CA-6I; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:29:15 -0800 Received: by pwi2 with SMTP id 2sf1905790pwi.16 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:29:03 -0800 (PST) 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: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=yoTlJWc7dkw1C7AUWrSL3pQthVgGgDLFG+oT0zQ0HBg=; b=7MurZ/v+m9JQzO0UbYF/G9Ajqy99pCSdE+XVnYug4oKF7Iv9QYZhU84No0UzTG0gea cSqlvGBn66anIc1jKj1oeT0sD0jAtFJJtQxyLPjxqLcG8kQpeCJ5rAdjRZnIJjyrgrsa +r2jKJbVsr3hUDMD5SgUBjhAuuOoWxX6Vun6I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version: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=VVY4W+8Qdtqb2WBewUAcjH0W1FP6sl0kZ8SCHM0ekDhCvR0kQyTxNPp+eQTPbr6Sfk F9ANjP3A+qTqfwVjqmeuu2EGRgKoPLPCQwnQwKAsn+oaxLnL1oUSObwDIQqBPg8odGkS 0L8INh1sBXQQi16JaOItffOwEhGIJ6IbEIS/Y= Received: by 10.143.153.15 with SMTP id f15mr221137wfo.36.1291044540153; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:29:00 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.249.41 with SMTP id w41ls8427098wfh.1.p; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:28:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.99.21 with SMTP id w21mr3965266wfb.14.1291044538831; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:28:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.99.21 with SMTP id w21mr3965265wfb.14.1291044538802; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:28:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pz0-f52.google.com (mail-pz0-f52.google.com [209.85.210.52]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id n6si6182772wfl.7.2010.11.29.07.28.57; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:28:57 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.52; Received: by pzk36 with SMTP id 36so919374pzk.11 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:28:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.229.4 with SMTP id b4mr5553607wfh.377.1291044537691; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:28:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.86.1 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 07:28:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:28:57 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Why does sei work the way it does? From: Ian Johnson To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: blindbravado@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=blindbravado@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: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd14fa00eefb8049632bbc9 --000e0cd14fa00eefb8049632bbc9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Why is: mi klama sei ko'a cusku be dei bei ko'e le zarci different from: mi klama sei ko'a cusku dei ko'e se'u le zarci (which isn't grammatical, even, but I think you see what I'm trying to do with it)? I understand wanting to elide terminators when possible, and I also understand that a common usage of {sei} would be to simply have a selbri and then be done with it, like in the CLL's example: la frank. prami sei gleki la djein. But this still seems unnecessarily awkward to avoid a terminator. It doesn't...flow. You're already breaking the flow of the text by using {sei} in the first place, but then on top of that the grammar inside the {sei} is forced to work differently just to avoid having to use a terminator every time. (Yes, doing it this way in a regular bridi would work too, but no one actually talks like that in regular bridi.) In short, in my opinion having to say: mi klama sei ko'a gleki se'u le zarci is worth it to be able to say: mi klama sei ko'a cusku dei ko'e se'u le zarci Any thoughts on this? mu'o mi'e .latros. -- 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. --000e0cd14fa00eefb8049632bbc9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Why is:

mi klama sei ko'a cusku be dei bei ko'e le zarci
=
different from:

mi klama sei ko'a cusku dei ko'e se'= u le zarci

(which isn't grammatical, even, but I think you see w= hat I'm trying to do with it)?

I understand wanting to elide terminators when possible, and I also und= erstand that a common usage of {sei} would be to simply have a selbri and t= hen be done with it, like in the CLL's example:

la frank. prami = sei gleki la djein.

But this still seems unnecessarily awkward to avoid a terminator. It do= esn't...flow. You're already breaking the flow of the text by using= {sei} in the first place, but then on top of that the grammar inside the {= sei} is forced to work differently just to avoid having to use a terminator= every time. (Yes, doing it this way in a regular bridi would work too, but= no one actually talks like that in regular bridi.)

In short, in my opinion having to say:

mi klama sei ko'a gle= ki se'u le zarci

is worth it to be able to say:

mi klama = sei ko'a cusku dei ko'e se'u le zarci

Any thoughts on th= is?

mu'o mi'e .latros.





--
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.
--000e0cd14fa00eefb8049632bbc9--