[lojban] Re: Puzzle

[John E Clifford <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

And yet {ka'e} seems to have been used (as its form suggests) for the impersonal "It is possible
that" while {kakne} does seem to have that personal capability reading -- innateness being just
one part of the range of sources of capability (part of {kakne3}.

--- Adam COOPER <adamgarrigus@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 8/22/06, Matt Arnold <matt.mattarn@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/22/06, Adam COOPER <adamgarrigus@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 8/22/06, Yanis Batura <ybatura@mail.ru> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "I can read and write" is translated to Lojban as
> > > >
> > > > (1) mi kakne lo nu tcidu kei .e lo nu ciska
> > >
> > >
> > > I have a sneaking suspicion that  {kei} is not needed there, and that
> > that
> > > was recently fixed in jboski [?!]
> > >
> > > > The more intuitive version,
> > > >
> > > > (2) mi ka'e tcidu je ciska
> > > >
> > > > is wrong. What does it mean?
> > >
> > >
> > > "I am-innately-capable-of reading and writing." A wise lojbanist pointed
> > out
> > > a few months back that {ka'e} does not have the same basic meaning as
> > > {kakne}.
> > >
> > > mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan
> > >
> > And what is that difference in basic meaning?
> > -epkat
> 
> 
> Innateness, which is part of the definition of {ka'e} but not of {kakne}.
> 



To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.