Re: [lojban] ka'e/kakne & mapti/sarxe

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Friday, March 02, 2012 15:20:59 Felipe Gonçalves Assis wrote:
> On 2 March 2012 14:48, Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
> > And I do internally interpret nu
> > abstractions as having a (possibly elided) ce'u in them (in other
> > words, since they are in the same selma'o as ka, I don't see any
> > reason to treat one different than the other in the "parts" they
> > contain)
> 
> They are also in the same selma'o as {du'u}. There is no implicit
> or explicit {ce'u} in du'u-clauses.

Being in the same selma'o means only that, if you have a syntactically valid 
sentence with "du'u" in it, you can substitute "nu" for "du'u" and get a 
syntactically valid sentence, and vice versa. It doesn't imply anything about 
implicit "ce'u". Similarly, "zi'o" is in the same selma'o as "ko'a", but 
"zi'o" does not have a referent; and "du" and "co'e" are in the same selma'o 
as "go'i", but it makes no sense to use "ra'o" with them. A sentence can be 
syntactically valid yet uninterpretable. le mlatu pe naku goi zi'o cu co'e 
ra'o lo cipni te.u lo ratcu.

Pierre
-- 
sei do'anai mi'a djuno puze'e noroi nalselganse srera

-- 
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.