Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2015 14:59:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Andrew <summerfallsaway@gmail.com>
To: Lojban Beginners <lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com>
Message-Id: <3cd42a90-6d87-4949-ad39-e70dc483c2e9@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <55B15CF2.4090601@gmx.de>
References: <0e6ef83b-e998-42a2-8e36-2a7dd87348b5@googlegroups.com>
 <ab13bf07-8af7-422b-9ad2-eb60cc9088c6@googlegroups.com>
 <55B15CF2.4090601@gmx.de>
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IFtsb2piYW4tYmVnaW5uZXJzXSBSZTogRGlmZmVyZW5lcyBiZXR3ZWVuIOKAnGth?=
	=?UTF-8?B?4oCdIGFuZCDigJxudeKAnQ==?=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_2927_1783219767.1439071153302"
Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.7
X-Spam_score_int: -16
X-Spam_bar: -
Content-Length: 4996

------=_Part_2927_1783219767.1439071153302
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_2928_1794028872.1439071153310"

------=_Part_2928_1794028872.1439071153310
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

.u'i 
I thought I understood the difference between {ka} and {nu}. Now I'm not so 
sure.

Abstractions are complicated.

On Thursday, July 23, 2015 at 2:30:26 PM UTC-7, selpa'i wrote:
>
> la zipcpi cu cusku di'e 
> >       It is easier and 
> >     cleaner for a language like Lojban to split the two meanings into 
> two 
> >     separate brivla, one that uses {nu} and one that uses {ka}. 
> > 
> > Yes, I have seen {kaidji} and made {kaitcu} as well, 
>
> (I already use nitcu2 as a property) 
>
> > but I'm not sure 
> > this is a sustainable route; we'd then need new brivla for every brivla 
> > where a {ka} belonging to x1 is useful as a substitution of {nu}, such 
> > as {gleki}, {nelci}, etc... 
>
> Would we really, though? Is it necessary to have ka-variants of 
> everything? Would you, hypothetically, use {mi sruma lo ka ce'u bilma} 
> for "I assume [myself] to be sick"? Or what about {mi kanpe lo ka ce'u 
> ba jinga}? Would it be too much to say {mi kanpe lo nu mi ba jinga}? 
>
> The {ce'u} actually doesn't save us that much trouble compared to using 
> one of the usual back-referencing mechanisms. Logically speaking, the 
> reason why {ka} is used in places like nitcu2 or troci2 is not in order 
> to not have to repeat the x1, but because it avoids sumti raising and 
> makes the predicates much easier to interpret and define. It is 
> primarily a semantic concern, not one of convenience; convenience is 
> only a lucky by-product of it. 
>
> mi'e la selpa'i mu'o 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

------=_Part_2928_1794028872.1439071153310
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">.u&#39;i <br>I thought I understood the difference between=
 {ka} and {nu}. Now I&#39;m not so sure.<br><br>Abstractions are complicate=
d.<br><br>On Thursday, July 23, 2015 at 2:30:26 PM UTC-7, selpa&#39;i wrote=
:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;bo=
rder-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">la zipcpi cu cusku di&#39;e
<br>&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 It is easier and
<br>&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 cleaner for a language like Lojban to split the two =
meanings into two
<br>&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 separate brivla, one that uses {nu} and one that use=
s {ka}.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; Yes, I have seen {kaidji} and made {kaitcu} as well,
<br>
<br>(I already use nitcu2 as a property)
<br>
<br>&gt; but I&#39;m not sure
<br>&gt; this is a sustainable route; we&#39;d then need new brivla for eve=
ry brivla
<br>&gt; where a {ka} belonging to x1 is useful as a substitution of {nu}, =
such
<br>&gt; as {gleki}, {nelci}, etc...
<br>
<br>Would we really, though? Is it necessary to have ka-variants of=20
<br>everything? Would you, hypothetically, use {mi sruma lo ka ce&#39;u bil=
ma}=20
<br>for &quot;I assume [myself] to be sick&quot;? Or what about {mi kanpe l=
o ka ce&#39;u=20
<br>ba jinga}? Would it be too much to say {mi kanpe lo nu mi ba jinga}?
<br>
<br>The {ce&#39;u} actually doesn&#39;t save us that much trouble compared =
to using=20
<br>one of the usual back-referencing mechanisms. Logically speaking, the=
=20
<br>reason why {ka} is used in places like nitcu2 or troci2 is not in order=
=20
<br>to not have to repeat the x1, but because it avoids sumti raising and=
=20
<br>makes the predicates much easier to interpret and define. It is=20
<br>primarily a semantic concern, not one of convenience; convenience is=20
<br>only a lucky by-product of it.
<br>
<br>mi&#39;e la selpa&#39;i mu&#39;o
<br>
<br></blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Lojban Beginners&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lo=
jban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban-beginners@goo=
glegroups.com">lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginn=
ers">http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

------=_Part_2928_1794028872.1439071153310--
------=_Part_2927_1783219767.1439071153302--