[lojban] Re: Archivist/Founders: {ri'a nai} vs. {se mau nai}

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 11:59:05PM -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Sunday 21 November 2004 23:41, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > Because "ri'a nai" should be "not caused by".  IOW:
> >
> >     mi klama ri'a nai lo nu do cpedu
> >
> > is "I came, but not because you asked".  This is *VERY*
> > different "I came despite the fact that you asked".  That it's
> > the latter and not the former seems a wart.
> 
> Is {to'e ri'a} a good way to say "despite"?

Oh, that's *very* slick.

Then we would have that:

{to'e ri'a} is "in opposition to (your asking)"

{no'e ri'a} is "in indifference to (your asking)"

{na'e ri'a} == {ri'a nai} is "not because of (your asking)"

{je'a ri'a} is "definately because of (your asking)"

Oh, yeah, this is *sweeeeet*.

Any objections?

Note, however, that {ri'a} is utterly wrong for this example.  My
bad.  Should be {mu'i}.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/