Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 18 May 2007 06:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hp2ug-0000PZ-I8 for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 06:54:35 -0700 Received: from mclmx2.mail.saic.com ([149.8.64.32] ident=[U2FsdGVkX1/qtjM+iPZhfO8ujSqs6xitrXohkb548iY=]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hp2ua-0000Ox-35 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 06:54:33 -0700 Received: from 0015-its-ieg02.mail.saic.com ([149.8.64.21] [149.8.64.21]) by mclmx2.mail.saic.com id BT-MMP-849546 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 09:54:19 -0400 Received: from 0015-ITS-EXBH01.us.saic.com ([10.43.229.18]) by 0015-its-ieg02.mail.saic.com (SMSSMTP 4.0.5.66) with SMTP id M2007051809541913227 for ; Fri, 18 May 2007 09:54:19 -0400 Received: from 0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com ([10.75.0.188]) by 0015-ITS-EXBH01.us.saic.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 18 May 2007 09:54:19 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C79954.07CF2D04" Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: the ".i" after "lu" Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 09:54:19 -0400 Message-Id: <1189A858F8918F43BE3F9C7603C73FB4031E7D38@0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com> In-Reply-To: <2f91285f0705180541p131cbc0dh5ffd737f0f8452f@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [lojban-beginners] Re: the ".i" after "lu" Thread-Index: AceZUhRyLRCu+JfQSXap8R69nbesfgAANK2g From: "Turniansky, Michael [UNK]" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 May 2007 13:54:19.0495 (UTC) FILETIME=[08107F70:01C79954] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 4497 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 17356 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C79954.07CF2D04 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable No, that's not John's sentence. John's sentence (as finished by Mary) is (putting back in the "lo" I left out): " mi djica lo bakni cidjrkari .e lo sluni nanba ku'i lo pu'e na'e cpina jukpa" Remember. This is two people talking.. One starts the setnence, the other finishes it, exactly as in the English. If you and I were in a room, and you said, "Hey, we know that girl" and I said, "From the party last night", you would not say that together we are saying "Hey, we know that girl Michael said, 'From the party last night' " (which even in English makes no sense). You would say that together we said, "Hey we know that girl from the party last night". =20 I as the authoer of those sentence about John and Mary are just reporting what THEY SAID. To the characters themselves, there is no "John said"/"Mary said" in their lives. =20 Understand? --Michael "gejyspa" Turniansky =20 =20 ________________________________ From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org [mailto:lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org] On Behalf Of Vid Sintef Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 8:42 AM To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: the ".i" after "lu" =20 I see. Just to make sure, if there's no ".i" and the sentence of John continues...=20 la djan cusku lu mi djica lo bakni cidjrkari .e lo sluni nanba li'u la meris cusku lu ku'i pu'e na'e cpina jukpa li'u ... that doesn't bear any logical meaning, right?=20 Or can the second "cusku" be the second selbri of "la djan" ("la meris" being the x2 of the first "cusku"), even though there's no connective like "gi'e" between the two bridi?=20 On 5/18/07, Turniansky, Michael [UNK] wrote:=20 Remember that ".i" is not so much a sentence _terminator_ as a sentence _separator_. It's often found at the beginning of utterances to show that what you say has no connection to the previous utterance (by you or another person) (and NOT usually at the end). So the first sentence says: Ranjit says, "I want beef curry and onion bread" =20 The second says: Ranjit said, "Jhoti greeted me" Either could have used or not used the .i at the beginning. It just makes it clear in the course of conversation that you are not piling onto the previous utterance. For example, consider this valid excahnge: =20 la djan cusku lu mi djica lo bakni cidjrkari .e lo sluni nanba li'u=20 .i la meris cusku lu ku'i pu'e na'e cpina jukpa li'u =20 John says, "I want beefy curre and onion bread" Mary says, "....but not cooked spicily".=20 =20 Without the ".i" in Mary's quote it continues the sentence of John. =20 --gejyspa =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 ________________________________ From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org [mailto: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org ] On Behalf Of Vid Sintef Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 7:18 AM To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] the ".i" after "lu" =20 Along the course "Lojban For Beginners" I saw sentences with the direct quotation word being followed by the sentence terminator ".i", like this:=20 la ranjit cu cusku lu .i mi djica lo bakni cidjrkari .e lo sluni nanba li'u=20 On the other hand, there are also sentences without ".i" after "lu":=20 la ranjit. pu cusku lu la djiotis. pu rinsa mi li'u=20 What is the difference between them?=20 =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C79954.07CF2D04 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

  No, that's not John's = sentence.  John's sentence (as finished by Mary) is (putting back in the "lo" I = left out): " mi djica lo bakni = cidjrkari .e lo sluni nanba ku'i lo pu'e na'e cpina jukpa" =   Remember.  This is two people talking..  One starts the setnence, the other finishes it, = exactly as in the English.  If you and I were in a room, and you said, "Hey, = we know that girl" and I said, "From the party last night", you = would not say that together we are saying "Hey, we know that girl Michael = said, 'From the party last night' " (which even in English makes no = sense).  You would say that together we said, "Hey we know that girl from the party = last night".

 

  I as the authoer of those = sentence about John and Mary are just reporting what THEY SAID.  To the characters = themselves, there is no "John said"/"Mary said"  in their = lives.

 

      =             &= nbsp;           &n= bsp; Understand?

      =             &= nbsp;           &n= bsp; =            --Micha= el "gejyspa" Turniansky

 

 

From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org = [mailto:lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org] On Behalf Of Vid Sintef
Sent: Friday, May 18, = 2007 8:42 AM
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: = [lojban-beginners] Re: the ".i" after "lu"

 

I see.
Just to make sure, if there's no ".i" and the sentence of John continues...

la djan cusku lu mi djica lo bakni cidjrkari .e lo sluni nanba li'u la = meris cusku lu ku'i pu'e na'e cpina jukpa li'u

...  that doesn't bear any logical meaning, right?
Or can the second "cusku" be the second selbri of "la = djan" ("la meris" being the x2 of the first "cusku"), even = though there's no connective like "gi'e" between the two bridi?



On 5/18/07, Turniansky, Michael [UNK] <MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.c= om> wrote:

  Remember that ".i" is not so much a = sentence _terminator_ as a = sentence _separator_.  It's often = found at the beginning of utterances to show that what you say has no connection to = the previous utterance (by you or another person) (and NOT usually at the end).  So the first sentence says:

Ranjit says, "I want beef curry and  onion bread" 

The second says:

Ranjit said, "Jhoti greeted me"  Either = could have used or not used the .i at the beginning.  It just makes it = clear in the course of conversation that you are not piling onto the previous utterance.  For example, consider this valid = excahnge:

 

la djan cusku  lu mi djica lo bakni cidjrkari .e = lo sluni nanba li'u

.i la meris cusku lu ku'i pu'e na'e cpina jukpa = li'u

 

John says, "I want beefy curre and onion = bread"

Mary says, "….but not cooked spicily". =

 

 Without the ".i" in Mary's quote it = continues the sentence of John.

 

         &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;  --gejyspa

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org [mailto: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org] On Behalf Of Vid Sintef
Sent: Friday, May 18, = 2007 7:18 AM
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: = [lojban-beginners] the ".i" after "lu"

 

Along the course "Lojban For Beginners" I saw sentences with the = direct quotation word being followed by the sentence terminator ".i", = like this:
la ranjit cu cusku lu .i mi djica lo bakni = cidjrkari .e lo sluni nanba li'u
On the other hand, there are also sentences without ".i" after "lu":
la ranjit. pu cusku lu la djiotis. pu rinsa = mi li'u
What is the difference between them?

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C79954.07CF2D04--