From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBCawNHwBBoEKfEEeA@googlegroups.com Wed Jul 06 06:16:24 2011 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QeRxm-00054L-6k; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:24 -0700 Received: by wyh13 with SMTP id 13sf13719183wyh.16 for ; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:15 -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:from :date:message-id:subject: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; bh=vavO7tPThVVTptki6FMIsKGR6dtnL3jO/vuHv4mPG2s=; b=v0dJv3V1JvuSbAdPX3R+Qz1P4gAoxljJZqHVnoTWQH1WAVsbdXPB8uzgaKtzr8J1bS 0+NLsoGhW4NrITVEfPdXHIE85+E7/UxdUiYYkeUK8rNbM2OUPVrRljqvS1MnJUCrNGVJ uL2PDpPtmNVyfnmakbe42RHKDJt9s+k/Euy1E= Received: by 10.216.232.85 with SMTP id m63mr2893351weq.4.1309958170254; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:10 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.235.213 with SMTP id u63ls2914061weq.0.gmail; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.217.0.129 with SMTP id l1mr388931wes.5.1309958168474; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.217.0.129 with SMTP id l1mr388930wes.5.1309958168398; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fh14si6618347wbb.0.2011.07.06.06.16.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.181; Received: by wyh22 with SMTP id 22so6555499wyh.40 for ; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.217.6.197 with SMTP id y47mr5593007wes.55.1309958168091; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.71.77 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 06:15:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Luke Bergen Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 09:15:48 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] da broda, ko'a broda, da bu'a, zo'e co'e To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@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: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf302ad698479cd204a7666741 --20cf302ad698479cd204a7666741 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I seem to remember getting a mild rebuke at using "da" for similar reasons that you give tijlan. I've been using ko'a broda ever since. It DOES make more sense, I think. I don't mean to say {da poi co'e cu broda} that's not general enough for me IMO. On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:05 AM, tijlan wrote: > >> We often use the combination of "da/de/di" & >> "broda/brode/brodi/brodo/brodu" when we describe the grammar by way of >> syntactically indicating but not semantically specifying the sumti & >> selbri spaces. For example: >> >> da broda lo nu brode kei de lo brodi di >> >> That is, some of us (including myself) tend to use a pair of "da/..." >> & "broda/..." to explain the general structure of a particular >> expression or to suggest how to put together whatever sumti or selbri >> for a certain form of expression. >> >> Some nintadni would then likely get the impression that >> >> whatever sumti <-- da >> whatever selbri <-- broda >> >> and perhaps, with the gimmicks of LE-sumtification and ME-selbrification, >> that >> >> me da (is-whatever) = broda >> lo broda (that which is-whatever) = da >> >> That notion might also be informally driven by the appearance that >> "da" and "broda" share an identical syllable. >> >> The whole assumed correspondence between "da" & "broda" wouldn't be >> correct, however. "da/..." are BOUND VARIABLEs, while "broda/..." are >> ASSIGNABLE PRO-FORMs", which is an important distinction to make >> regarding the practice of quantification. Also, there is the >> selbri-type of bound variables -- "bu'a/bu'e/bu'i" -- and the >> sumti-type of assignable pro-forms -- "ko'a/ko'e/ko'i/...". That is: >> >> "broda" (assignable pro-form) aligns more with "ko'a" (assignable >> pro-form) than with "da" (bound variable) >> >> and >> >> "da" (bound variable) aligns more with "bu'a" (bound variable) than >> with "broda" (assignable pro-form) >> >> These alignments may be comparable to that of "zo'e" & "co'e" as well. >> >> With that in mind, which of the following combinations would most >> finely substitute for the oft-used "da broda" in generalizing >> grammatical structures: >> >> ko'a broda >> da bu'a >> zo'e co'e >> >> >> mu'o mi'e tijlan >> > > da broda > > If it ain't broke, don't fix it. > > -- > mu'o mi'e .aionys. > > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) > > > -- > 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=en. > -- 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=en. --20cf302ad698479cd204a7666741 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I seem to remember getting a mild rebuke at using "da" for simila= r reasons that you give tijlan. =A0I've been using ko'a broda ever = since. =A0It DOES make more sense, I think. =A0I don't mean to say {da = poi co'e cu broda} that's not general enough for me IMO.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Jonathan Jon= es <eyeonus@gmail= .com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6,= 2011 at 3:05 AM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px= #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> We often use the combination of "da/de/di" &
"broda/brode/brodi/brodo/brodu" when we describe the grammar by w= ay of
syntactically indicating but not semantically specifying the sumti & selbri spaces. For example:

=A0da broda lo nu brode kei de lo brodi di

That is, some of us (including myself) tend to use a pair of "da/...&q= uot;
& "broda/..." to explain the general structure of a particula= r
expression or to suggest how to put together whatever sumti or selbri
for a certain form of expression.

Some nintadni would then likely get the impression that

=A0whatever sumti <-- da
=A0whatever selbri <-- broda

and perhaps, with the gimmicks of LE-sumtification and ME-selbrification, t= hat

=A0me da (is-whatever) =3D broda
=A0lo broda (that which is-whatever) =3D da

That notion might also be informally driven by the appearance that
"da" and "broda" share an identical syllable.

The whole assumed correspondence between "da" & "broda&q= uot; wouldn't be
correct, however. "da/..." are BOUND VARIABLEs, while "broda= /..." are
ASSIGNABLE PRO-FORMs", which is an important distinction to make
regarding the practice of quantification. Also, there is the
selbri-type of bound variables -- "bu'a/bu'e/bu'i" --= and the
sumti-type of assignable pro-forms -- "ko'a/ko'e/ko'i/...&= quot;. That is:

=A0"broda" (assignable pro-form) aligns more with "ko'a= " (assignable
pro-form) than with "da" (bound variable)

and

=A0"da" (bound variable) aligns more with "bu'a" (= bound variable) than
with "broda" (assignable pro-form)

These alignments may be comparable to that of "zo'e" & &q= uot;co'e" as well.

With that in mind, which of the following combinations would most
finely substitute for the oft-used "da broda" in generalizing
grammatical structures:

=A0ko'a broda
=A0da bu'a
=A0zo'e co'e


mu'o mi'e tijlan
da broda

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
<= font color=3D"#888888">
--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e= 9;ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
<= div class=3D"h5">

--
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@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
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.
--20cf302ad698479cd204a7666741--