From lojban+bncCIfp7ILVEBDynfvvBBoE2uqQvA@googlegroups.com Sun Jun 19 21:39:28 2011 Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QYWGh-00030w-Tr; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:27 -0700 Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4sf3589100pzk.16 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature: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:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=v5OZWPzBetRZTFJaLCWr7XKixX+wRFq/dQy7Zlr17k4=; b=xNHmyXsSA424ZA6eYCJHWsRMey5eMnz5qY+9Wnt8KfXfXTgekZr0X9HEE6x8Zuawwi F4yon6j9ANjzG6ens2zRVHulgSNkb+9OCyId6kTEfY6vzM8psLuLwhJbuWHLErL3pewU lzJPsKLQi2Zn0riCnRd9eg6sRtOFxjqsdG2vo= 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=0DVmabKEKMr7A+BY24Ht/hp2qqVyS1pLudOo8tYLFXXCKl0khDqmO5c73ihpoyyHd8 9mXEGxCun1+OBRNbg240PMhzKT73vUNMTcNfJ0uj+Za9VeC5G4kKsXZATIU482IigpWB VP06iTz8VXSDsjSJZbqazW1JWUGMFYDHvyCTU= Received: by 10.142.203.21 with SMTP id a21mr363398wfg.13.1308544754237; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:14 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.15.3 with SMTP id t3ls1399575pbc.1.gmail; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.32.232 with SMTP id m8mr863344pbi.98.1308544753214; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.32.232 with SMTP id m8mr863343pbi.98.1308544753203; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com (mail-pz0-f46.google.com [209.85.210.46]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c10si11077077pbi.2.2011.06.19.21.39.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.46 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.46; Received: by pzk9 with SMTP id 9so3985860pzk.5 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.2.129 with SMTP id 1mr1458906pbu.145.1308544752946; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.48.102 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:39:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 01:39:12 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] non-ka properties From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Felipe_Gon=E7alves_Assis?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: felipeg.assis@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.46 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=felipeg.assis@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 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 ta'onai 2011/6/18 Jorge Llamb=EDas : > 2011/6/18 Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis : >> >> Clarifying: I was not marking the return value with {ce'u}, I understand >> it marks the argument. I was expressing the return value as the x1 of >> {broda} when saying {lo broda be ce'u}. > > I think your using "se stuzi" when you meant "stuzi" is what confused me. > Yeah, sorry. And thank you very much for the many examples. Only one particular use of ka-makau made me feel uneasy: as the x2 of {cipra}: > > ".i ny ca'o tolylau sezysku =ABlu vajni .i tolvajni .i tolvajni .i vajni > li'u=BB tai lo nu cipra lo ka ma kau pe ce'u xagmau kei lo valsi" > > ".i my te zu'e lo nu cipra lo ka ma kau kukte ce'u kei gy cu bevri lo > so'i te cuxna noi preja punji ke'a lo to'e cnino karni" > From the gimste, I would describe a se cipra as a pure ka, non-kau, property. That is, in a cipra the te cipra is tested for whether it satisfies a certain predicate, specified by the se cipra (or for how well does it satisfy that predicate, in a fuzzy approach). Reading a ka-makau makes me wonder if the cipra is being interpreted as some kind of measure of what stands in the place indicated by {makau}. Well, at least in the first example, this is not the case. The original passage reads "and went on to himself in an undertone, `important--unimportant-- --unimportant--important--' as if he were trying which word sounded best= ." Personally, and keeping the original approach, I would translate the tai argument as {lo cipra be lo ka xagrai bei lo valsi}, (the omission of the {nu} is a separate discussion) ni'o A second issue, which has been in my mind since I first considered the kau approach: How does {ka broda} compare to {ka xukau broda}? (My current understanding still is that they mean the same) Good enough, we already have a concrete example (which, by the way, also involves a {nu cipra}): > > ".i na banzu fa lo temci lo nu gy cipra fi lo re ninmu fe lo ka xu kau > zukte fi lo nu xendo" > mu'o mi'e .asiz. --=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.