DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;        b=CVIPiOxa5AJmIsOPqoyn2bj/D5V1hnTyL6G73nj+JizP62k2aOJemrqYsrht1SSlbU         2BFCaZuQ8L1gXGfr8zHTiaG36EikK56Kqj0s74BaamGJSbb/N9ATv5guRONRrI+ZnWk3         ZR0ITGnA7upUvuUw+GDboyWHP9GhUAPq+jt1c=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4de8c3930903020421n2e1e76fdo368df594e382bdeb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <70697fa40903012056l33282c52wa186bb16109c5059@mail.gmail.com>	 <4de8c3930903020421n2e1e76fdo368df594e382bdeb@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 00:04:05 +0800
Message-ID: <70697fa40903020804y946b44bxe182a877d2cf77f@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: How to express " though " "even if "
From: J Y <kkm2019@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Length: 1658

>"{da'i}" is also a discursive, and so there is absolutely no reason to precede
>it with "{sei}."  In fact, in this instance, the "{sei}" also includes the
>"{pindi}", resulting in the incomplete statement "I am happy, regardless of [In
>fact, one is poor] ..." in which "{gi'u}" has no right operand.

>Combining your attempts into "{mi gleki gi'u ku'i pindi}" (or "{mi pindi ku'i
>segi'u gleki}") should provide the correct combination of contrast and
>causative independence that you're trying to convey, though it doesn't
>explicitly state that you are, in fact, poor.  Looking through the {cmavo} list
>right now, "{ki'unai lonu mi pindi kei mi gleki}" seems to be exactly what you
>want; I was unaware that "{nai}" could be attached to modals.  Carrying the use
>of uncommon constructs a step further, "{mi pindi gi'e seki'unai bo gleki}" may
>be even more desirable for you, along with its many variations, which are left
>as an exercise to the reader.

mutce cfipu mi .uanai

Er, the logical connectives that end with U state a non-causal
relationship between two elements ?  But I don't know exactly how to
use { .u } {  ju }  ....
I think { gi'u } may be enough to express that there is no causal
relationship between { mi gleki } and { mi pindi } . I just don't know
whether the bridi after { gi'u } must a statement or just a suppose.

> I usually use "to'e ki'u nai" for that, literally "not prevented by":
>
>  mi gleki to'eki'unai lo nu mi pindi
>

That is hard to understand for me.
In fact I want to mean { lonu mi pindi na mukti lonu mi na gleki
}&{lonu mi pindi na srana lonu mi gleki }   ( ra'anai lonu pindi ? )

mu'o mi'e la se cfipu