From lojban+bncCOib25n_BhCJtKbxBBoE5W6d2A@googlegroups.com Fri Jul 22 08:41:12 2011 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QkHqe-0005tw-Hr; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:41:11 -0700 Received: by wyh13 with SMTP id 13sf4292519wyh.16 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:41:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=IB2saggzBK2bi5IYfxFUXJxSZlQ8DN73DamkXfj5LcQ=; b=t++oPzDCcpiTAAYvHQMNMv5WjY7whuL80blcq4Bdn7Oy6VzfoABYc7nO//0RlXALq5 4pODlYs2vn1XI1rr5NUSgZLqE2fw8ycZ+5z/pkr35CVmm7vYnaPNpOLBfGxdRvNGBbAO CuKIVuoU+pQnsfiwfDzw9g7Jm8KtpfDcY5DYg= Received: by 10.216.182.18 with SMTP id n18mr738992wem.14.1311349257408; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:57 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.26.37 with SMTP id b37ls236387eea.5.gmail; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.37.135 with SMTP id y7mr104908eea.48.1311349256204; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.37.135 with SMTP id y7mr104907eea.48.1311349256179; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ew0-f42.google.com (mail-ew0-f42.google.com [209.85.215.42]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x46si2692133eeh.2.2011.07.22.08.40.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.42; Received: by mail-ew0-f42.google.com with SMTP id 2so2216430ewy.15 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.205.65.13 with SMTP id xk13mr500894bkb.400.1311349255642; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.70.196 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:40:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 11:40:55 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Meaning of multiple negations From: ".arpis." To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: rpglover64@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rpglover64@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: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec5431d8e8f1e1d04a8aa4a7e --bcaec5431d8e8f1e1d04a8aa4a7e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So is this something that has a correct and accepted and confusing answer, or is this something still under active discussion? 2011/7/22 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Ian Johnson > wrote: > > {na} has full bridi scope (which is *radically* different from how > natlangs, > > or at least English, work); > > That in itself wouldn't be a problem. More troublesome is that "full > bridi scope" is not well defined. What would you say are the relative > scopes of "su'o", "gi'e" and "na" in: > > su'o prenu cu ricfu gi'e na gleki > > (I say that means "su'o da poi prenu zo'u ge da ricfu gi da na gleki" > but that puts "na" within the scope of both "su'o" and "gi'e", so no > "full bridi scope" there.) > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > -- > 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=3Den. > > --=20 mu'o mi'e .arpis. --=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. --bcaec5431d8e8f1e1d04a8aa4a7e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So is this something that has a correct and accepted and confusing answer, = or is this something still under active discussion?

2011/7/22 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1= 2:52 AM, Ian Johnson <blindbra= vado@gmail.com> wrote:
> {na} has full bridi scope (which is *radically* different from how nat= langs,
> or at least English, work);

That in itself wouldn't be a problem. More troublesome is that &q= uot;full
bridi scope" is not well defined. What would you say are the relative<= br> scopes of "su'o", "gi'e" and "na" in:=

=A0 su'o prenu cu ricfu gi'e na gleki

(I say that means "su'o da poi prenu zo'u ge da ricfu gi da na= gleki"
but that puts "na" within the scope of both "su'o" = and "gi'e", so no
"full bridi scope" there.)

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.




--
mu'o mi= 'e .arpis.

--
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.
--bcaec5431d8e8f1e1d04a8aa4a7e--