Re: [lojban] Am I completely wrong about tanru?

[Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com>]

Yeah that seems funky to me.  I think it's not necessarily a good idea to try to turn tanru into logical connectives like ja or jenai.  But I agree with you, I would read "donri nicte" as something like "a very day-like night" (perhaps it's very bright due to the moon and you can see clouds?)

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Alex Rozenshteyn <rpglover64@gmail.com> wrote:

Almost all the ones not in the first set.

The idea that you could use {donri nicte} to refer to {donri ja nicte}, which can be {donri jenai nicte} (in case I got my logical connectives wrong, in English: "day night" to refer to "day or night" which can be "day, but not night") seems contrary to the idea of "a day type of night"

This list makes perfect sense if its purpose were to give examples of tanru counterparts in other languages, but I didn't see that mentioned.

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:

I was under the same impression.  But keep in mind, the first word in the tanru modifies the second word.  So by extension, ko'a will have some attributes of the {broda} since {brode} is a {broda} type-of {brode}.

hmm, that could be better said.  If {lo mamta patfu} is a motherly kind of father, then in the bridi {ko'a mamta patfu} we are first and foremost saying that {ko'a} is a {patfu}.  But we are also saying that ko'a is a {mamta} kind of {patfu}.  So the nature of the tanru will always imply that x1 has some of the characteristics of each of the words in the selbri.  But the places are ultimately those of the right-most word (unless you do "co" and such).

A better example:  {ko'a blanu zdani}.  Yes, ko'a is a house, but since we are saying that it's a {blanu} type-of {zdani} it just so happens that {ko'a} could very well fill out the x1 of {blanu} as well.

Which examples in particular were throwing you off?

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Alex Rozenshteyn <rpglover64@gmail.com> wrote:

I was under the impression that {da broda brode} logically necessitates that {da brode}.  Am I wrong?

Some of the examples in http://dag.github.com/cll/5/15/ seem to indicate that this is not the case.  Am I misunderstanding the purpose of the section?

--

          Alex R

--
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.

--

          Alex R

--
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.