Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 05 Jul 2006 07:55:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fy8n2-00022b-1i for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 07:55:44 -0700 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.227]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Fy8n0-00022T-2V for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 07:55:43 -0700 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i28so952533wra for ; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 07:55:38 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=LFe4X1PV3Y0gkGOH4ltvXTUp0UWs5UTgSVeH39iqF+f6yXTfds3KROUq4mI194phMryWjBMrCoihUbZwEu/kjOu4HwzplaKPiiXS4E8ttMJQa5p40d1xdXXspOoEwnAjoLeYJ94jbdosUqZVIdYVTHVTgXU9oJdTiL9OY6WCb4Q= Received: by 10.65.211.14 with SMTP id n14mr5452902qbq; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 07:55:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.153.10 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jul 2006 07:55:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <537d06d00607050755v7b2d995ex8ec5f0199554fbc2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 16:55:38 +0200 From: "Philip Newton" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: RK-like diagramming: Anyone interested? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44AAC810.2070300@hypermetrics.com> <44AADE4C.3080601@hypermetrics.com> <200607042148.25751.phma@phma.optus.nu> <44AB5FB7.2010609@hypermetrics.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 3339 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: philip.newton@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 815 On 7/5/06, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > Although there is the example of > > > "le nu broda ku brode" and "le nu broda kei brode" are grammatical, > > but "le nu broda brode", eliding both terminators, is not. > > from the discussion, that leads me to ask; is a statement that > consists of just a sumti, with no selbri, grammatical or > ungrammatical? Grammatical, as I understand. Not least because it lets you answer fill-in-the-blank questions, for example: Q: do klama ma A: le zarci "Where are you going?" - "To the market." So I believe that {le nu broda brode} is grammatical; it's merely not equivalent to the other two example, since {broda brode} forms a tanru there. mu'o mi'e .filip. noi ca mrilu fo la djimeil. mu'i tu'a la timos. -- Philip Newton