Received: from mail-qw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.216.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P1ktZ-0004yl-67; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:53 -0700 Received: by qwf6 with SMTP id 6sf656928qwf.16 for ; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:43 -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-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=GZi9xKKpzdeJbvWV5WOSP/dbFnitnK//XRyFdpxLSI8=; b=N2MZ9JwlIlXQel3AGCY5rsbRTz+El8YSyrADztpz5Qgsj999Cc3RnUboDQwdEPdoH4 6sRt5CQbXRwa2lMizmMmVFyfmItzn0sSVSyOXl9vF5yx6oUTdol4Td+JMK/WDbo9GHA5 EfvP3UWYcS+vOo3fnGOEg/vuvuYZf2Sy5nMuQ= 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-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=laRKORfd00A5N2zGX6XgrUhqioR+CwD6DUZ7FQCQXaD05ScEH3aURgpuC5st+UTV2w GXSfRd12Z2DCF5ONnM6/I2FnqrLMVbdcvAikMZxvQs8NbwjxA7ZXflOEf5gKbmOgzBAK IaUkAc+kmLDWneRgZYWcZbMsz2joiq1Oail0E= Received: by 10.229.43.136 with SMTP id w8mr408349qce.45.1285959803134; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:23 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.229.19.84 with SMTP id z20ls1235210qca.2.p; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.229.10 with SMTP id jg10mr1146378qcb.7.1285959802261; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.229.10 with SMTP id jg10mr1146377qcb.7.1285959802208; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id l26si829960qck.1.2010.10.01.12.03.21; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:21 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.44; Received: by mail-qw0-f44.google.com with SMTP id 9so1916068qwc.31 for ; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.95.66 with SMTP id c2mr4244088qcn.85.1285959800953; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:03:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.79.81 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 12:03:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9A313EBC-E0FD-40BB-B083-F8B65E729883@switchb.org> References: <671C9B4A-4E53-4F59-8B06-22E74A4A7AC7@switchb.org> <9A313EBC-E0FD-40BB-B083-F8B65E729883@switchb.org> Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 15:03:19 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] cusku/NU From: Alex Rozenshteyn To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: rpglover64@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rpglover64@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163642753f219c82049192d948 Content-Length: 5121 --00163642753f219c82049192d948 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Because I thought {se du'u} was the wrong thing... Let me work through this: du'u : x1 is a predicate expressed by sentence x2 se du'u : x1 is a sentence expressing predicate x2 lo se du'u broda : a sentence meaning {broda} (the phrase it stands in for, not the word itself) amirite? On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Kevin Reid wrote: > > On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:58, Luke Bergen wrote: > > oops. I thought that's what {du'u} was. I thought {se du'u} was "the >> sentence that expresses a bridi". So I would think that {se du'u} is the >> actual sentence and {du'u} is the basic relationship that the {se du'u} is >> expressing. >> > > Yes, exactly so. > > 1. You said "you are fat" to me do cusku lu do plana li'u mi > 2. You said that I am fat do cusku lo se du'u mi plana > > #1 implies #2; #2 is less specific than #1, in that it does not give exact > phrasing. > > Why do you think you need to use some other abstraction than {du'u}? > > > -- > Kevin Reid > > -- > 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. > > -- Alex R -- 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. --00163642753f219c82049192d948 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Because I thought {se du'u} was the wrong thing...

Let me work t= hrough this:
du'u : x1 is a predicate expressed by sentence x2
se= du'u : x1 is a sentence expressing predicate x2

lo se du'u = broda : a sentence meaning {broda} (the phrase it stands in for, not the wo= rd itself)

amirite?

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:09 = PM, Kevin Reid <= kpreid@switchb.org> wrote:

On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:58, Luke Bergen wrote:

oops. =A0I thought that's what {du'u} was. =A0I thought {se du'= u} was "the sentence that expresses a bridi". =A0So I would think= that {se du'u} is the actual sentence and {du'u} is the basic rela= tionship that the {se du'u} is expressing.

Yes, exactly so.

1. You said "you are fat" to me =A0 =A0do cusku lu do plana li= 9;u mi
2. You said that I am fat =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0do cusku lo se du'u mi pla= na

#1 implies #2; #2 is less specific than #1, in that it does not give exact = phrasing.

Why do you think you need to use some other abstraction than {du'u}?


--
Kevin Reid =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0<http://swit= chb.org/kpreid/>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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+un= subscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.




--
=A0=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Alex R

--
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=3Den.
--00163642753f219c82049192d948--