From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Sep 04 13:23:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 4 Sep 2001 20:23:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 79906 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 19:57:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Sep 2001 19:57:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.73) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Sep 2001 19:57:39 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:57:36 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 19:57:36 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: specificity of 'ma' Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 19:57:36 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Sep 2001 19:57:36.0310 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7EF0560:01C1357B] From: "Jorge Llambias" la pycyn cusku di'e >Would {da} count as an answerr to {ma klama le zarci}? >I don't think so; there is a relevance/informativeness condition on >answers, >sure. {le klama be le zarci} also won't do. Does {lo prenu} count as an answer? "A person" counts as an answer to "what goes to the store?", but not as an answer to "who goes to the store?". My impression was that {ma klama le zarci} could be either, and one can use {le mo} and {lo mo} to make clear the specificity required (specific "which"/"who" vs. non-specific "what"). mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp