[lojban-beginners] Re: Complicated parallelism question

[Hussell <jeremyhussell@gmail.com>]

On Jan 29, 9:03 pm, Lindar <lindartheb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> While that certainly parses, I'm not exactly sure that it means what you
> want it to. I'd recommend you double-check that.

Well, I double-checked, and I still think it means what I think it
means. Could you be a little more specific about your objection,
instead of spreading FUD?

If one person is unclear about how this construct works, then it's
likely a bunch more lurkers are too, so: my understanding is {mi cilre
fi la loglan e ba bo la lojban} means the same as {mi cilre fi la
loglan i je ba bo mi cilre fi la lojban}, and in both cases lojban is
learned about *after* loglan is learned about. Another way to say the
same thing is {mi cilre fi la loglan gi'e ba bo cilre fi la lojban}.
There is no way to combine a tense and a logical connective in
forethought form, although they can be expressed separately as {mi
cilre fi ba gi la loglan gi la lojban} and {mi cilre fi ge la loglan
gi la lojban}. There's also no way to express an afterthought tense
*without* a logical connective, except between sentences.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.