[lojban-beginners] Re: Some questions

[Rob Speer <rspeer@MIT.EDU>]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 07:19:28PM +0200, Yuval Harel wrote:
> 1) I've noticed people are signing their posts with signatures such as 
> "mu'o mi'e iuv?l". Does that not defy the meaning of {mu'o}? If 
> attitudinals are allowed to be attached to {mu'o} it no longer marks the 
> end of the utterance. When used in speech, it seems that the listener must 
> infer where the attached attitudinal list ends from context.

An interesting point - perhaps it should be "mi'e rab.spir mu'o". But I
think that, as non-computers, we understand that someone saying "mu'o"
at least gets to finish the sentence.

> 2) How would one go about marking the scope of {ko}? As an example: I 
> assume that "ko broda ki'u mi cusku lu ko broda li'u" means la'e"You  
> should {{broda} {because I said 'You should broda'}}"; how can "{You should 
> broda} {because I said 'You should broda'}" be translated into Lojban?

Congratulations, you just hit on a point that we're debating right now.
One way to express the second is to just use a separate sentence.

{.i ko broda .i seki'u di'u mi cusku lu ko broda li'u}

It even makes sense that you should logically have to do this, because
your reason is not a reason for broda-ing, but it's a reason you gave
the command.

> 3) Is something like "fa mi fa do broda" grammatical? What would that mean?

It's certainly grammatical. It's also been given a meaning - the same as
"mi e do broda".

-- 
mi'e rab.spir mu'o