[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban-beginners] Re: attitudinals question
- To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: attitudinals question
- From: "Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:12:24 -0300
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=iRV1aoJFOO47CPstowr2kxIi/awixVe/G3rbHVhT0p0=; b=eYTVMCPKCrs8o3IOLDtYj+C77WDoEIJQIs+mpKzUDU6T0vmvr6VQ8/UKe5y7PUv5+m x4z7TtI5f8714cKz3LBxytkE0VZNb3M/9bf5nonVzMAF2SEtH0QI1NGXtRKKmmKtHiMI +mL0f6Jd5hbSjwqfnJFWGe3cfLt5RmREru6/I=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=F5GoAPmCs2PUvTcJpJGdmHsuI/3lK85qlzrMNC36edmTB9U14ELbLjaLtO13i1q/A1 k8aZrcU/Z83ANWmqnR43jOOUxtWo8yP5MTwpqTHHLogkWacKknKbsBN7E1I891tU9b7v Lmz5rXnNwaQsfLcWdBoLsPZ21D890gSsIb750=
- In-reply-to: <5715b9300812111452h2771b99cnffea157a0484adfb@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <5715b9300812111452h2771b99cnffea157a0484adfb@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 7:52 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it legitimate to use attitudinals as regular words?
(They are regular words. I think you mean as brivla.) No, they can't
be used as brivla directly.
> ie. is the following
> lojban sentence acceptable?
>
> xu do .ui
>
> or does this just mean "are you <I'm happy>"?
It means "are you?" or "do you?" (or "were you?", or "did you?", or
...) depending on the understood predicate, plus an expression of
happiness from the speaker.
You could however use an attitudinal to construct a zei-lujvo, for example:
xu do ui zei co'e
"Are you ui-ish?"
mu'o mi'e xorxes