Received: from mail-yw0-f143.google.com ([209.85.211.143]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OJR2R-0006ZB-Ux; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:58 -0700 Received: by ywh7 with SMTP id 7sf5097593ywh.26 for ; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=nDcC/MCbhXgjrZVjC7VN1MW406KnBQapy56wBcD6oQ8=; b=uYnFxRdxCv/63dtbB/Uw8UTiJHikyHQDkwZCja/8m/drwWGRttHeS8nBBiV4WUXSVd 8IApPtaGwQ7d0knRuw5viR6uTt1ij4lPb/IooEj4QS9zdgpbsZ2kfEzY52YokHuJHNmJ tUgq7YXwXK0/BUkut0cAVIJEGMbZCKuM1rn/E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=eyyK1nmAuUEFVwjXp2v0v0MyBochKKjkwmIVdudFEZKQhpYREeQ0ITWdc8a84MvxgH 2RQMtnWd68UO+E+5yGwSClrVqNLYVvEkDUv13VybOVw//PmQJXb5/9TZpH9+Fdq3XCOi k+deri08/Ag7hKk718P+rxMj0Orib1M+icbDg= Received: by 10.101.175.34 with SMTP id c34mr160613anp.67.1275397056061; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:36 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.132.3 with SMTP id j3ls1513905ann.3.p; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.28.35 with SMTP id b35mr1861528anb.4.1275397055384; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.28.35 with SMTP id b35mr1861527anb.4.1275397055303; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f182.google.com (mail-gy0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id z17si5296445ank.5.2010.06.01.05.57.34; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:34 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.182 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.182; Received: by gyh20 with SMTP id 20so3949064gyh.27 for ; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.213.136 with SMTP id gw8mr923592qcb.193.1275397054061; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:57:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.82.11 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 05:57:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 09:57:33 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Something is place xi because... From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.182 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1622 On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Ian Johnson wrote: > Is there a (preferably compact) way to say not: > {ko'a broda ko'e ko'i} because .... > but instead: > {ko'a broda ko'e ko'i} and {ko'i} is the x3 of broda because ... If something like that makes sense, it is a sign that the place structure of "broda" is cobbled together from two or more different relations. > The specific situation I'm thinking of is with {pacna}, justifying why the > x3 is what it is. I was saying something like "x1 hopes for x2 with expected > outcome x3 and the expected outcome is what it is because ..." Saying that > the {pacna} predicate as a whole is justified by this thing isn't quite > right, because the x1 doesn't hope for x2 for that reason, and in fact the > reason x1 would hope for x2 would probably be a {se mukti}, whereas this > reason might be, say, a {se rinka} (perhaps if x1 hopes for a physical > impossibility, which is what came up in this case). The x3 of "pacna" is weird. The probability that something happens has nothing to do with whether anyone hopes for it to happen or not. I suggest: ko'a pacna ko'e noi no cu'o ki'u ... x1 hopes for x2, which has zero probability of occurring because ... mu'o mi'e xorxes -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.