Re: [lojban] GIhA question

[Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>]

I don't think the exact semantics of zo'e filling are defined in all cases. That is, I don't think the language defines {mi tavla gi'e citka vau} as {mi tavla gi'e citka vau vau} or as {mi tavla gi'e citka vau zo'e vau}, but rather whichever one fits the context (in this case, almost certainly the former).

mu'o mi'e .latros.

On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Cyril Slobin <cyril@slobin.pp.ru> wrote:

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:

>  Also, if you DID want to have same unspecified-but-obvious object
> that you both talked to and ate, you could say "mi tavla gi'e citka
> vau zo'e"
>               --gejyspa

Hmm, THAT became interesting. What about {mi tavla gi'e citka vau}?
Does this imply some object that is both talked to and eaten, or not?
I don't know, really.

--
http://slobin.pp.ru/ `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said,
<cyril@slobin.pp.ru> `it means just what I choose it to mean'

--

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

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.