From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Wed Aug 29 16:53:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 29 Aug 2001 23:53:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 69932 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 23:52:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Aug 2001 23:52:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta05-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.45) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Aug 2001 23:52:43 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.253.84.6]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010829235242.GKEJ20588.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:52:42 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Another stab at a Record on ce'u Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:51:49 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" Xod: > On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, And Rosta wrote: > > > > i. ce'u makes sense in li'i as well as du'u and ka. > > > > Actually, I don't think so. Does "li'i da -rain" [bugger. tip of the > > tongue. carmi?cevni? no] (= experience of it raining) make sense. I > > think it does. So I think "experience of having legs" is NOT > > "li'i ce'u se tuple" but rather "li'i le se NO'AU se tuple", where > > NO'AU = next outer phrase (regardless of whether it is a bridi) = a > > sibling of NO'A. > > li'i ce'u klama > experience of going > > li'i ce'u xelklama > experience of being a vehicle > > etc. But what sort of thing is ce'u in this construction. It seems nothing more than a variable bound to x2 of li'i. That's not at all what ce'u in ka or si'o or du'u is. So I'd change your examples to: li'i le se no'au klama experience of going li'i le se no'au xelklama experience of being a vehicle (Tho ideally I'd like li'i too to die.) > > > b. ka and du'u are interchangeable if there is at least one ce'u. > > > > I don't dare make statements about ka. Too hazardous. > > This is an inocuous, uncontroversial statement, issued by John Cowan many > days ago, to which I have seen no dispute. Oh I see. You mean semantically interchangeable. -- Yes. I thought you were talking about conventions for interpreting elided sumti. > > > d. si'o implicitly fills up all the places with ce'u. > > > > Yes. > > > > > But outside of si'o, all empty places are zo'e. > > > > Again, with the exception of ka, unless and until consensus is agreed > > on workable conventions for it. > > This is a proposal for writing, from now on. All writers really should > start putting in ce'us wherever they need them. Nice to find out that my much execrated Lojban style is to be in the vanguard... --And.