Re: [lojban] Please, the best explanation of {le} vs. {lo}

[Анатолий Гашев <volishavas@gmail.com>]

Sorry, unerror update
  from: He/she has not any specific meaning for me at all that is why I called him/her {lo nanmu}, but not {le ninmu}.
  to: ... {le nanmu}.
(In full: He/she has not any specific meaning for me at all that is why I called him/her {lo nanmu}, but not {le nanmu}.)

воскресенье, 23 июня 2013 г., 18:41:58 UTC+6 пользователь Анатолий Гашев написал:
> Using here {le nanmu} is not better and actually it might be wrong. Cuz it may be that I just now saw a woman, which I described as a man and I think the person is a man.
> He/she has not any specific meaning for me at all that is why I called him/her {lo nanmu}, but not {le ninmu}.
> Please, everybody, read xorlo-update already cuz the {lo}-meaning has changed dramatically since CLL, which is dated by 1997.
>
> воскресенье, 23 июня 2013 г., 18:18:40 UTC+6 пользователь v4hn написал:
> > On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 03:21:50AM -0700, Анатолий Гашев wrote:
> > > I may call a woman with {lo nanmu} if I think the person is a man.
> > > You can ask about that almost anybody, especially la tsani or la selpa'i. 
> > > And they can say am I right or not.
> >
> > Yes, you can do that. Obviously. How else would you describe someone
> > who seems to be a man?
> >
> > Nevertheless, you say something ba'e wrong then.
> > Using {le nanmu} (which in my opinion is better style anyway when you
> > have someone specific in mind) you do not, because you refer to
> > a specific individual no matter the description.
> >
> >
> > v4hn

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.