From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDhnYzxBBoEbnJNOQ@googlegroups.com Sun Jul 17 09:33:50 2011 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QiUHs-0006Ao-EU; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:50 -0700 Received: by gyg4 with SMTP id 4sf3093052gyg.16 for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; 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; bh=1tdKGfFro8ipzWqONoYv0LN/FFiwRAVTgNTu4YczehE=; b=5Sz1F4177Ma2BHJg7ScTfTkMp5NcAG3v4Ge4pAjxRfFSV67am+MazzUs7DkcBwHXDG SUp0eIph0CKxpGcw7msrvYaUMt6Joy5D+sU9YdzsbUw3Y42niaI/zJVH0E6s38vouQfx +A4l5oUrBknhyqKfGclnyZYiV6IiMn4sSQnTU= Received: by 10.236.197.105 with SMTP id s69mr664881yhn.35.1310920417783; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:37 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.179.157 with SMTP id bq29ls1372642ibb.2.gmail; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.140.67 with SMTP id j3mr2548193icu.74.1310920416962; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.140.67 with SMTP id j3mr2548192icu.74.1310920416952; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f47.google.com (mail-vw0-f47.google.com [209.85.212.47]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g20si1752175icm.5.2011.07.17.09.33.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:36 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.47; Received: by vws2 with SMTP id 2so1953867vws.6 for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.95.206 with SMTP id dm14mr5214827vdb.378.1310920416152; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.111.198 with HTTP; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:33:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 13:33:36 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] girzu gi'i gunma gi'i se gunma 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 209.85.212.47 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: 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 On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 7:58 AM, tijlan wrote: > 2011/7/16 Jorge Llamb=EDas : >> "lo" covers the non-distributive sense of "loi" (i.e. "lo" allows both d= istributive and non-distributive). > > Does "non-distributive" mean "collective"? If collective is the complement of distributive, yes. If there's something else that is neither distributive nor collective, then it's part of non-distributive. > The BPFK defines "fa'u" as: > > =A0"Respectively. Joins two sumti into one sumti. The referents of the > resulting sumti are the referents of both sumti considered jointly and > distributively in correspondence with another term." > > Would you say this is an ordered version of "jo'u": "jo'u + ce'o"? No, I think "fa'u" only cares about order in a purely syntactic sense. In "ko'a fa'u ko'e", the only relevance to ko'a and ko'e being ordered is that they will be matched with something else that will be pronounced in the same order. It's purely an order of presentation, an order of words. In "ko'a ce'o ko'e", what "ce'o" indicates is that the referents of ko'a and ko'e have some relevant order in the relationship they are entering with something else. Here the order in which the words are presented is reflecting some order in that which the words are describing. > could the non-set "fa'u" and the non-set "ce'o" have the same function > when used for structurally corresponding pairs of terms: > > =A0ko'a fa'u ko'e xabju fo'a fa'u fo'e > =A0ko'a ce'o ko'e xabju fo'a ce'o fo'e The first one is just a compact way of saying "ko'a xabju fo'a .i ko'e xabju fo'e". The second one could be saying a lot of things. We don't have enough context to know what ordering is relevant. My first guess would be time. First ko'a and later ko'e inhabited first fo'a and later fo'e, but that's only one of many possibilities, and there are more clear ways of saying that in any case. It may be that the "fa'u" reading is also a possible reading for the "ce'o" sentence. 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.