[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[jbovlaste] Re: Alice in Wonderland 06
- To: jbovlaste@lojban.org
- Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: Alice in Wonderland 06
- From: "A. PIEKARSKI" <totus@rogers.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 06:17:11 -0700 (PDT)
- Delivery-date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 06:18:39 -0700
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rogers.com; s=s1024; t=1280409431; bh=P6Jz15kJqwjzbslAIyHUGuSMKeWdDFXwo4NwdBuGkeU=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=kFT26fYQYWTh3R39gpgQBuJS2ZDqnjSYeKGfpvfFKKUoTF7PKuBt00QIe8ZkgjhPUSw10i0BQdTq3h6Uaim24RLg0Y38M0nYoTyAFWTRwhsUGbkB9EBlQ9WFTCgDzwPxfH8gNihVSYrJ5aUNIWA8xltnhXKrDw5nFJlin8Mcark=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=bOl7xn9oZ/oy0P2UOrBYGa4Wq+r4AkEg0vvKePQB1ekpc1cKamUgGlHJWasL0WauGM2mRTCldvTryOlKs5VleSySxUF8JpkqvHHIIVlT+mcvMaYP+8ny7msE64CHlrG0DNqLYPusDxL8uqVdRcgXi47kMqaUlxlqFID6OvrbH6c=;
- Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
- In-reply-to: <AANLkTikSa2GKPFyXa=SLR1miYsVpfGzn9DqkDBNbR2=x@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <895447.11228.qm@web88006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <AANLkTi=Yfk4fFGZoABtmFOan=5BzEYy-8Wfx8CsV7BdL@mail.gmail.com> <278347.68416.qm@web88001.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <AANLkTikSa2GKPFyXa=SLR1miYsVpfGzn9DqkDBNbR2=x@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org
- Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org
> >> > 2)
> >> > p1 rutpesxu g2
> >> > p1 is a jam/jelly/confiture/marmalde/ fruit preserve made from g2
> >> > from
> >> > p1 pesxu tu'a lo grute be g2
> >> >
> >>
> >> Curious as to why you went with "tu'a lo grute be g2" rather than
> >> simply "g1". I think I know the answer (you wanted a flavor/variety,
> >> rather than a specific fruit), and don't REALLY have a problem with
> >> it, but it would seem to me that g1 would have accomplished the same
> >> thing in the context.
> >
> > But it's g2 that defines what kind of fruit it is. Without it its just a
jam
> > made from some unspecified fruit.
> >>
>
> No, because even if it's defined as a paste made from a fruit g1, I can say:
> mi pu citka lo rutpesxu be lo fragari .ije ku'i nelrai tu'a lo
> rutpesxu be lo vanjba It certainly is made from SOME particular
> strawberries/grapes, and it's also true that "lo fragari cu grute la'o
> lin. Fragaria lin.", so the strawberry is a g1, not the g2.
I sort of follow what you're saying. But what would
{p1 rutpesxu g1} be developed from? What is the expanded form?
{p1 pesxu g1 noi grute g2}?
totus