That reference agrees with me, gejyspa.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:Well, no. I refer you to CLL 17.14:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 2:28 PM, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It's easier to keep I and YOU than forever distinguish between I as
>> speaker and YOU as listener.
>
>
> Except that I /is/ /always/ the person speaking, and you /is/ /always/ the
> person listening.
>
> Using any vocative except ``mi'e'' (explained below) implicitly defines the meaning of the
> pro-sumti ``do'', as the whole point of vocatives is to specify the listener, or at any rate
> the desired listener --- even if the desired listener isn't listening! We will use the terms
> ``speaker'' and ``listener'' for clarity, although in written Lojban the appropriate terms
> would be ``writer'' and ``reader''.
So do doesn't have to be even listening. And we also know that
mi'e can assign a plural to "mi". (CLL 7.2) Questions like what does
"mi'e le gerku" mean (presumably "okay, I am speaking for the dog
now") are left open.
--gejyspa