Re: [lojban] Re: ka + makau (was: ce'u (was: vliju'a

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la xod cusku di'e

> > >     ko'a ko'e frica le ka ce'u prami ko'i
> > >     ko'a ko'e frica le ka ce'u prami ko'ikau
> > >     "X differs from Y in who they love"
> > >
> > >Does this imply that ko'a and ko'e love the same value for ko'i?
>
> What if ko'i is a mass? Think about 3 men and 2 dogs.

A mass is still a single referent. You'd be saying that they
both love the mass (each in their own way though, thus the
difference).

The 3 men 2 dogs problem was with non-masses. The mass case
is the easy one.

> > Yes, in both cases. According to some interpretation of
> > the Codex Waldemari, {ko'ikau} would actually be equivalent
> > to {ba'eko'i}.
>
> Where is that interpretation? It says kau can be attached to ma & da with
> the same effect, so why not ko'a?

I don't have the Book with me now, but I believe there is an
example with {la djan kau} or similar? {ku'ikau} is just
like it.

About {lu'e}, I have two semi-objections which may or may not
add up to one.

Semi-objection 1: It already has a different meaning.
The way I understand it, {lu'e} is the reverse operation
of {la'e}, so {lu'e la'e di'u} = {di'u},
{lu'e la djan} = {zo djan} and I suppose {lu'e le klama}
would be {lu le klama li'u} or something like that, i.e.
essentially a text. I have never seen {lu'e} actually being
used though, so if you can find a more useful meaning for it
I won't object very strongly. You would re-define it as
{lu'e ko'a} = {le du'u makau du ko'a}.

Semi-objection 2: It only replaces {makau}, not {mokau},
{xokau}, {jikau}, {peikau}, etc, and even with {makau},
in many cases it makes the expressions more convoluted.

mu'o mi'e xorxes




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp