From pycyn@aol.com Fri Aug 31 13:42:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 31 Aug 2001 20:42:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 29206 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 20:41:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Aug 2001 20:41:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r06.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.102) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Aug 2001 20:41:31 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id r.159.3bb831 (18255) for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:41:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <159.3bb831.28c15075@aol.com> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:41:25 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Siver threads among the mold To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_159.3bb831.28c15075_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_159.3bb831.28c15075_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/30/2001 9:21:50 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > > > la djan dunli la pol le ka ce'u clani sela'u makau > la djan dunli la pol le ni ce'u clani > John is equal to Paul in how tall they are. > > How else would you use 'dunli'? > Well, lots of otehr ways, I suppose, but these examples look paradigmatic. What was the point of them, since I think they are fine? I don't see that at all, what could be more different than that one is 5'6" and the other 6'5"? And, indeed, it is just that difference that makes the difference in the ni2 case; you just come at it a different way. In short, I am unconvinced that there are two uses here that have been separated yet,and the fact that that they are intertranslatable in a mechanical way tends to support this feeling. Part of the problem is, I think (as you know by now), is that there is a hidden relative here trying to be fit into an indirect question. Another part is that we have not yet completed the analysis if the various parts and are off on the wrong foot on one part. For example, I think that at this point, {ka} and {du'u} part company again, with {ka} giving unique values and {du'u} sets of values, but the two have gotten so slopped together (and {ce'u} with {kau} a bit as well) that it is not easy to sort out the pieces any more. And again, how do you know which it is in a given case, so that the theory you are building is built only on cases you want in? --part1_159.3bb831.28c15075_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/30/2001 9:21:50 PM Central Daylight Time,
jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:




      la djan dunli la pol le ka ce'u clani sela'u makau
      la djan dunli la pol le ni ce'u clani
      John is equal to Paul in how tall they are.

How else would you use 'dunli'?


Well, lots of otehr ways, I suppose, but these examples look paradigmatic.  
What was the point of them, since I think they are fine?

<But the frica case does NOT work with ni1. It only works with ni2.>
I don't see that at all, what could be more different than that one is 5'6"
and the other 6'5"?  And, indeed, it is just that difference that makes the
difference in the ni2 case; you just come at it a different way.  In short, I
am unconvinced that there are two uses here that have been separated yet,and
the fact that that they are intertranslatable in a mechanical way tends to
support this feeling.  Part of the problem is, I think (as you know by now),
is that there is a hidden relative here trying to be fit into an indirect
question.  Another part is that we have not yet completed the analysis if the
various parts and are off on the wrong foot on one part.  For example, I
think that at this point, {ka} and {du'u} part company again, with {ka}
giving unique values and {du'u} sets of values, but the two have gotten so
slopped together (and {ce'u} with {kau} a bit as well) that it is not easy to
sort out the pieces any more.

<The 1-2 contrast is the contrast between {le broda} and
{le du'u makau broda}. In English both can often be said
using the same words.>

And again, how do you know which it is in a given case, so that the theory
you are building is built only on cases you want in?

--part1_159.3bb831.28c15075_boundary--