[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban-beginners] Re: cibyseltuple
- To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: cibyseltuple
- From: Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 16:26:28 -0300
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NaWnTc/vlaV21HCL478z+agMLrCuICV2iIpPkLxXnnc=; b=OsuNGl3YmfrSIi6cSVEr+3eT5b0ldP1HFbsrjMXY+HIt9uJ7z6mghYnY+j4/dRlV/h zcTUwiKZJrX6lmuxoF3QJcaSILPXnYngtukndLDM5Q5SoBz2RnOWWc7mP8SdniDIWa3E gZH3NfnXMUcm4l47+rwyadBb86v8PYc4iOS2s=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=o1aay2bhMzABRs21oZEihcqDoA4iTvztbZYffmPhx2MQzl70eRBG574Fa/90TiQjPK 9Ytgf4oVBgKY37pEu98mD4z08mCmTafqeKEBDC64prurpwT6gCCurEx1WVNRtBRzux9D X7Eh4CFx69hkQnZMEebHhfQRennDxkGfQA96Q=
- In-reply-to: <737b61f30907031720j571349edw6f0d49810130a2b9@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <737b61f30907031720j571349edw6f0d49810130a2b9@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
On 7/3/09, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm wondering about the lujvo "cibyseltuple". A "seltuple" would be
> something with a leg. So "cibyseltuple" would be "three somethings
> with legs", right?
Something with three legs. Compare with the classic "pavyseljirna".
Also "relselxi'u", although people seem to prefer "relxilma'e".
> Or are we taking advantage of the ambiguity
> inherent in tanru to select the more sensible meaning here? If it's
> the latter, that means there's probably no good way to programatically
> gloss this lujvo well, as the "cib" applies to the "tuple" part, while
> the "fa" place is assigned the "seltuple" part. Which is more mixed up
> than any generic algorithm could unmix.
"Three-legged", "seltuple be ci da". But I don't think an algorithm to
gloss any lujvo based only on its rafsi would be at all easy to come
up with.
mu'o mi'e xorxes