Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <lojban-beginners+bncCNf8pM-bDBDL547rBBoE2P2ifg@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1Prrst-0005Al-Pp; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:02:38 -0800
Received: by wyb34 with SMTP id 34sf3389314wyb.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:02:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender
         :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
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=avv6lu5UmMHBS0TVezUlbChAGa8dLloGh73Nr2voJN0=;
        b=rhOraaJ0ZS4f4Ub4gBis3AfVPqK4qvTd+dKsTOr397rrmBq/PQEtke7iLgsdeWSsjT
         f8Bfna/m/ByDuF0LCc1o4+wHTOHwI6YyL8WWx+mM1zXkp676GHp/PhgqKJHBLi9jX1YK
         5T/Fgr6UYbWy8/CjHYXXrYW07akADS0xq5IYI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender: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:list-subscribe
         :list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        b=eXj0SP1kCzBGCUfvQBBu72maT98QvgHtDxg7IxAYm5iIIyRejEMybRAKtpPbS+qHw+
         6PFRhk/L/YrxkgT+ZA3xluO2NlFyfgjkIS0DwOr50zb2jaDTD0J9ZLmd6Q27r/w8SBN0
         EC43SBVk/f3pBx0zSZ8INOIQuH1YYRr2T4rOQ=
Received: by 10.216.23.78 with SMTP id u56mr798538weu.15.1298379723118;
        Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:02:03 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.216.16.79 with SMTP id g57ls28173weg.0.p; Tue, 22 Feb 2011
 05:02:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.254.9 with SMTP id g9mr176259wes.13.1298379721855;
        Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:02:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.179.75 with SMTP id g53mr168514wem.1.1298372547025;
        Tue, 22 Feb 2011 03:02:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.179.75 with SMTP id g53mr168513wem.1.1298372546999;
        Tue, 22 Feb 2011 03:02:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ww0-f50.google.com (mail-ww0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l26si785009weq.14.2011.02.22.03.02.25
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Tue, 22 Feb 2011 03:02:25 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.50 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.50;
Received: by mail-ww0-f50.google.com with SMTP id 26so6674392wwf.7
        for <lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 03:02:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.27.202 with SMTP id e52mr2069811wea.75.1298372545688; Tue,
 22 Feb 2011 03:02:25 -0800 (PST)
Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.216.19.13 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 03:02:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikGxmxs4q9dZajjib4LRUQoWB0GqvmF_c3_=jCZ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimpzxxJpOSRnmX1s-wuoTJNYEU9YP3ZjXATitgF@mail.gmail.com>
	<201102171403.40004.phma@phma.optus.nu>
	<AANLkTimQYOAwhcRs8FDk88VJPB-fGADYwKwGTRmt2hrR@mail.gmail.com>
	<201102171622.02738.phma@phma.optus.nu>
	<AANLkTi=iZFZ2JDxSo0AeOsYzmT87mYeVBww621dQHxEx@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimCbx34wn76g3vVR-dLjCxyb6HS7+b+HQVwHoA-@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimXRCuu30WT4--zw5Zw+JTmG3yPknUXzgPnPT9B@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimGF7m4Butpq0AWNEd-v13AgEk=zGP9=v__tapF@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimjSFDdKAr3Q2yFy+kD-tz7ivd2DDQngT=k2mf0@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTik6QQt3prhiF=pH_xa8MBi+u2_w=UMCZLZQOs6d@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=awoQpSVrYKygAS42RWeRcfrZLutg1PHKXtVaX@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikvEDJBtBvR-CPXuGe3xY13q38nfNdGf4hHLphQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikGxmxs4q9dZajjib4LRUQoWB0GqvmF_c3_=jCZ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:02:25 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=hWTmvAYUfDGFxt=mn=0dVxL3M1_8UkB_qNTgL@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Question about {roda}
From: tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: paskios@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of paskios@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.50 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=paskios@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: <lojban-beginners.googlegroups.com>
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban-beginners+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en_US>
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:lojban-beginners+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 2092

On 21 February 2011 18:19, Remo Dentato <rdentato@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 12:13 PM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Using an unbound "da", can one say "ro da noi prenu cu xebni mi" to
>> mean the usual sense of "everyone hates me" (where "everyone" doesn't
>> include "me")?
>
> Why the {da noi prenu} rather then {da poi prenu}? I don't get why one
> would want to use an "unbound {da}" and then use an incidental to
> better specify it.

I would normally use {poi}.

By "unbound" I meant more like "whether everything including me or
everyone but me" rather than "whether or not a person". {noi} doesn't
really "better specify" the referent of {da} any more than describe
what's already been specified or left unspecified by other grammatical
means. The point of my question was that: if {da} can be implicitly
restricted, not only {ro da} should be able to refer to "everyone but
me", but also the choice of {noi} would be just as valid as the
speaker's acknowledged freedom of implication, perhaps even preferable
to its non-incidental counterpart {poi}; if {da} cannot be
contextually restricted, not only {ro da} must include "me" and all
non-persons in every case, but also the incidental description {noi
prenu} would be accordingly incorrect.


> Also, since {mi} is a {prenu} I don't see how this
> would exclude "me" from "everyone".

{noi prenu} has nothing to do with including or excluding "me". It
grammatically neither narrows nor broadens the reference of the sumti
it's attached to. (And this non-restricting behavior becomes
problematic when that sumti is something like {ro da}. Whether or not
{da} can be implicitly restricted determines when {noi} cannot be used
with {ro da}.)

-- 
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.