Subject: Re: mine, thine, hisn, hern, itsn ourn, yourn and theirn (was[lojban] si'o)

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 02:46:09 -0400 (EDT)

Nick NICHOLAS scripsit:
> 
> la pier. ba'o facki la'edi'e:
> 
> > tanru_unit_B_152 : ME_477 sumti_90 MEhU_gap_465 MOI_476
> 
> Oh my God.
> 
> There is only one explanation for this, which is that Lojban Central
> wanted normal sumti, and not just numbers, to be ordinals.

No, no. That was a serendipitous side effect. The point of me+sumti+moi
was to allow full math expressions, not just digit strings, as
numerical selbri. The typical case is me li ny su'i pa mei
'an n+1-some' or me li ny su'i pa moi 'the n+1th'.

> ... I found this in the refgramm; dunno whether it answers my question,
> but it horrifies me even more:
> 
> ***
> 
> It is perfectly possible to use non-numerical sumti after ``me'' and
> before a member of MOI, producing strange results indeed:
> 
> 11.15) le nu mi nolraitru
> cu me le'e snime bolci
> be vi la xel. cu'o
> The event-of me being-a-nobly-superlative-ruler
> has-the-stereotypical snow type-of-ball
> at Hell probability.
> I have a snowball's chance in Hell of being king.

Check out the preceding Example 11.14, which is the normal case.

-- 
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan [email-masked]
Please leave your values | Check your assumptions. In fact,
at the front desk. | check your assumptions at the door.
--sign in Paris hotel | --Miles Vorkosigan