Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fort-point-station.mit.edu ([18.7.7.76]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19cukj-0004Yd-00 for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:28:01 -0700 Received: from central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (CENTRAL-CITY-CARRIER-STATION.MIT.EDU [18.7.7.72]) by fort-point-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h6GMRw9T001675 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:27:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (MELBOURNE-CITY-STREET.MIT.EDU [18.7.21.86]) by central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h6GMRweR026200 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:27:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from torg.mit.edu (TORG.MIT.EDU [18.243.1.228]) ) by melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h6GMRwU8028205 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:27:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rob by torg.mit.edu with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19cukb-00018K-00 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:27:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:27:52 -0400 From: Rob Speer To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Some questions Message-ID: <20030716222752.GB4093@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-archive-position: 403 X-Approved-By: rspeer@MIT.EDU X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: rspeer@MIT.EDU Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 1446 On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 07:19:28PM +0200, Yuval Harel wrote: > 1) I've noticed people are signing their posts with signatures such as > "mu'o mi'e iuv?l". Does that not defy the meaning of {mu'o}? If > attitudinals are allowed to be attached to {mu'o} it no longer marks the > end of the utterance. When used in speech, it seems that the listener must > infer where the attached attitudinal list ends from context. An interesting point - perhaps it should be "mi'e rab.spir mu'o". But I think that, as non-computers, we understand that someone saying "mu'o" at least gets to finish the sentence. > 2) How would one go about marking the scope of {ko}? As an example: I > assume that "ko broda ki'u mi cusku lu ko broda li'u" means la'e"You > should {{broda} {because I said 'You should broda'}}"; how can "{You should > broda} {because I said 'You should broda'}" be translated into Lojban? Congratulations, you just hit on a point that we're debating right now. One way to express the second is to just use a separate sentence. {.i ko broda .i seki'u di'u mi cusku lu ko broda li'u} It even makes sense that you should logically have to do this, because your reason is not a reason for broda-ing, but it's a reason you gave the command. > 3) Is something like "fa mi fa do broda" grammatical? What would that mean? It's certainly grammatical. It's also been given a meaning - the same as "mi e do broda". -- mi'e rab.spir mu'o