Received: from mail-pv0-f189.google.com ([74.125.83.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pslo7-0004eG-Hk; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:22 -0800 Received: by pvc22 with SMTP id 22sf154771pvc.16 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:13 -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 :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :x-google-group-id:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=KCoh8bLHx1AmEm/tZpQZgpqTDRhFm8f/JRMuxVZB9u0=; b=55SGbtwoo5hRp9R3Y6oKoZWjFCIKCOU5Ti3PXAqQxZhl5VasnlUBYSUMNJW3Zj0yXm Gjc5s9QLX1rNwz0ButRdiGGbxGsQFfnOYuPbTeic6xICliVp1yYCXi1/8HFLEBKsu23Z 6CUx6HzTGCvb+V11sG0fRbAFJ6zcZS7EMGRIA= 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:x-google-group-id:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=bXX+Q1GZo2BwqK5qhoZrVmzoJKtj+evI2xIPu6y0FWEFI0sP087xdj/ChuvhuDDJ1J IFXEs1wDH/4/oJYm39/W05FmHEWYLu0mG8QtQqJdGYIjz44IVBt4c6KkM3fDHm1tTUqr QJ8criWpaNy8wlz73tokYM7V3MuB2OlQ/xSE4= Received: by 10.142.241.20 with SMTP id o20mr107426wfh.5.1298594705764; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:05 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.97.18 with SMTP id u18ls906074wfb.2.p; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.173.5 with SMTP id v5mr225569wfe.61.1298594704711; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.173.5 with SMTP id v5mr225568wfe.61.1298594704675; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-px0-f180.google.com (mail-px0-f180.google.com [209.85.212.180]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u26si96610wfc.5.2011.02.24.16.45.04 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.180 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.180; Received: by pxi10 with SMTP id 10so846428pxi.25 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.245.6 with SMTP id s6mr1171708wfh.201.1298594704272; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.53.5 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:45:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201102241123.58373.phma@phma.optus.nu> References: <201102232335.57096.phma@phma.optus.nu> <201102241123.58373.phma@phma.optus.nu> Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:45:04 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: BAI zi'o From: Ian Johnson To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: blindbravado@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=blindbravado@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Google-Group-Id: 94518172 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=000e0cd2de9e0e2c9f049d10a41e Content-Length: 4663 --000e0cd2de9e0e2c9f049d10a41e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 That's inconsistent with what you said earlier. That is, if {no da} *really* works the same between both cases, then {lo du'u ko'a broda no da cu nibli lo du'u ko'a na broda} and {lo du'u ko'a broda broda TAG no da cu nibli lo du'u ko'a na broda} must both be true. I know the former is true; you said the latter is false. mu'o mi'e .latros. On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Thursday 24 February 2011 10:13:11 Ian Johnson wrote: > > That seems like a pretty significant irregularity to me; if {no da} fills > a > > predicate place, it is as if {na} were put in, but if {no da} fills a TAG > > place, it isn't. Or is it that {broda TAG} is a new predicate which is > > false when {broda TAG no da} is true even though {broda} itself may be > > true? > > "noda" works the same way whether it's in a numbered place or a tagged > place. > Prepositions (including tense markers) can be negated, though, whereas FA > cannot. > > Pierre > -- > I believe in Yellow when I'm in Sweden and in Black when I'm in Wales. > > -- > 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. > > -- 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. --000e0cd2de9e0e2c9f049d10a41e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That's inconsistent with what you said earlier. That is, if {no da} *re= ally* works the same between both cases, then {lo du'u ko'a broda n= o da cu nibli lo du'u ko'a na broda} and {lo du'u ko'a brod= a broda TAG no da cu nibli lo du'u ko'a na broda} must both be true= . I know the former is true; you said the latter is false.

mu'o mi'e .latros.

On Thu, Fe= b 24, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
On Thursday 24 February 2011 10:13:11 Ian Johnson wrote:<= br> > That seems like a pretty significant irregularity to me; if {no da} fi= lls a
> predicate place, it is as if {na} were put in, but if {no da} fills a = TAG
> place, it isn't. Or is it that {broda TAG} is a new predicate whic= h is
> false when {broda TAG no da} is true even though {broda} itself may be=
> true?

"noda" works the same way whether it's in a numbered pl= ace or a tagged place.
Prepositions (including tense markers) can be negated, though, whereas FA cannot.

Pierre
--
I believe in Yellow when I'm in Sweden and in Black when I'm in Wal= es.

--
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@googlegr= oups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.


--
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.
--000e0cd2de9e0e2c9f049d10a41e--