From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDSv_7nBBoEfeymtA@googlegroups.com Wed Dec 08 07:11:51 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PQLg3-0004IB-N7; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:11:47 -0800 Received: by wwb34 with SMTP id 34sf1043720wwb.16 for ; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:11:25 -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 :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=4Yin0WmF3Da89o+idnC/czRlB+dqTii3AxK0erUeZnc=; b=qdFrbf93j61FIekjygpYYCXTMxaNuLcjLFLHDSdWFO2nX/zcwvLFCDz9mO4bPLze2a 6ZGMJZYOeUjWNIjFPSlkKsx21ulDpu8Q9839IsNsGDoIskxJr78d0L0ZJRpStLBIVThD 2eUYLXqjdfMY9NiDfpvUxyHYHUpccdVI8oK7U= 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=vv4BfSh3n/wEQCb0oLP2fca/Lq1wWrBjPhFB3pWrlIda93HC94XB9RM/eAwpCgYYtV tAKgKvY1SmjP7//EUd7n6xGY8NvS27qRgQX2HomqHAsNzzf7nD7opd6Th3O23oQbiLVD rPiN2IFI+70xd0Hv6sNB0sZhBFbozS4srQWBs= Received: by 10.216.180.194 with SMTP id j44mr136776wem.0.1291821010689; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.110.83 with SMTP id m19ls371171wbp.0.p; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:10:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.7.212 with SMTP id e20mr395926wbe.10.1291821009162; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:10:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.7.212 with SMTP id e20mr395925wbe.10.1291821009097; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:10:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ww0-f54.google.com (mail-ww0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id k2si107669wbc.3.2010.12.08.07.10.08; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:10:08 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.54; Received: by wwb31 with SMTP id 31so1431083wwb.11 for ; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:10:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.133.134 with SMTP id f6mr8947605wbt.202.1291821007056; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:10:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.54.72 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 07:10:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 12:10:07 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] conditional and hypotetical sentences 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 74.125.82.54 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 Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Luke Bergen wrote: > > Is there a version of "ka'e" that > doesn't have that irritating "innate" aspect of it? =A0I don't {ka'e limn= a}, > but I {kakne lo nu limna}. "ka'e" is not really about capability, so the "innate" thing doesn't really make much sense there. "ka'e" is about possibility, not capability. If an event or situation is possible, you mark it with "ka'e", if it's not only possible but actually happens, you mark it with "ca'a". Events don't really have "innate" capabilities of happening, they are just possible or impossible, and "ka'e" marks an event, not an agent. "ka'e" cannot be about the innate capabilities of the x1, there is no selection of the x1 by a selbri tag. "ka'e limna" says that someone swimming in some fluid is possible. It is not about the swimmer's innate capabilities to swim any more than about the fluid's innate capabilities of being swum in. > We've got: innately able (generic, don't care if you have done it or not)= , > non-innately (learned) able AND has exercised this learned ability, and > non-innately (learned) able AND has NOT exercised this learned ability. Who is the one having exercised or not this "ability"? You or the fluid? For talking about an innate capability, there is "se jinzi": mi se jinzi lo ka ce'u limna lo djacu Which has nothing to do with: lo djacu cu se jinzi lo ka mi limna ce'u "mi ka'e limna lo djacu" is neither of those. It's just about my swimming in water being something that can happen. > =A0What if I don't care about whether I've exercised the learned behavior= yet? > =A0I want the generic aspect of ka'e but the non-innateness of nu'o/pu'i. > =A0Does that exist in some cmavo I've never noticed before? "ka'e" cannot be about the x1's capabilities for doing something, whether innate or learned. 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.