From lojban+bncCIPo5fbjAhCPxoLpBBoEBZKBCA@googlegroups.com Sun Jan 02 08:09:11 2011 Received: from mail-qw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.216.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PZQUL-0006R4-Vd; Sun, 02 Jan 2011 08:09:11 -0800 Received: by qwd6 with SMTP id 6sf41450409qwd.16 for ; Sun, 02 Jan 2011 08:08:52 -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: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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tJepY3oY9e0UGnDJ0zMlYnWyRWhL8yygLuDrxJ4Xc/4=; b=lLmCdx5cdOlPw33n5PJG6FPylc2MGrZRvSOJ58m9R6xFFfoc2hwVoI6Wsq2TQKyJ4N EBramYkgDM5Q11od8NyieAwKZ7OLJxnDw+RT9AhDEKm5eWY2ZYCozMZTN1KMFcp44Qgz vA4Cs0RCU0AJEKlA+qnVm0GQy3AIj+CoxfAOw= 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:content-transfer-encoding; b=aidpWQ5vNI2T49tGZ6ryNuD84Z0XSiUCVdRKXi4obGwkuURcYr6OIJqJLSZ3jdpkoS JUQzEJ/FeuynztYfQ+yuSAPmZmhZ1NV+QNlZFTTzd2ytF2TONlygt8dXJ3rGq/8zuoMQ cTWL/4Vx9JKwX1k+fDD/rDyzi+q/nm+yKhe6w= Received: by 10.229.31.149 with SMTP id y21mr2504013qcc.46.1293984527997; Sun, 02 Jan 2011 08:08:47 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.224.222.20 with SMTP id ie20ls3224448qab.7.p; Sun, 02 Jan 2011 08:08:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.89.73 with SMTP id d9mr1811780qam.12.1293984527637; Sun, 02 Jan 2011 08:08:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.148.3 with SMTP id v3mr5405011wfd.43.1293915124023; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 12:52:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.148.3 with SMTP id v3mr5405010wfd.43.1293915123994; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 12:52:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pw0-f52.google.com (mail-pw0-f52.google.com [209.85.160.52]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id f13si19795192wfo.4.2011.01.01.12.52.02; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 12:52:02 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of cyril.slobin@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.52; Received: by pwi5 with SMTP id 5so2011085pwi.11 for ; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 12:52:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.139.17 with SMTP id m17mr15383752wfd.41.1293915121066; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 12:52:01 -0800 (PST) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.185.21 with HTTP; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 12:52:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201012301717.31348.phma@phma.optus.nu> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 23:52:00 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] GIhA question From: Cyril Slobin To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: cyrilslobin@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of cyril.slobin@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=cyril.slobin@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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Michael Turniansky wrote: > =A0Also, if you DID want to have same unspecified-but-obvious object > that you both talked to and ate, you could say "mi tavla gi'e citka > vau zo'e" After a cup of tea: I think now that you are wrong. {mi tavla gi'e citka vau da} is equal to {mi tavla da gi'e citka da}, where {da} IS a shared object. {mi tavla gi'e citka vau zo'e} is equal to {mi tavla zo'e gi'e citka zo'e}, where {zo'e} IS NOT a shared object. Unless you agree with this, you must state that either (1) adding an elidable terminator {vau} changes a meaning of sentence, or (2) using {zo'e} has a different meaning that an absent argument. Both seems not plausible for me. For the second possibility: consider me wanting to share the third argument, not the second. I've always believed that {mi tavla zo'e da} and {mi tavla fi da} are equivalent, and therefore {mi tavla gi'e pinxe vau zo'e da} and {mi tavla gi'e pinxe vau fi da} are equivalent too. BTW, this (unlike talking to things eaten) has really happen with me during today New Year party! ;-) --=20 http://slobin.pp.ru/ `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, `it means just what I choose it to mean' --=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.