From araizen@newmail.net Wed Sep 19 18:18:38 2001
Return-Path: <araizen@newmail.net>
X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 20 Sep 2001 01:18:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 2952 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2001 01:18:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
  by 10.1.1.224 with QMQP; 20 Sep 2001 01:18:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO out.newmail.net) (212.150.54.158)
  by mta1 with SMTP; 20 Sep 2001 01:18:37 -0000
Received: from oemcomputer ([62.0.180.149]) by out.newmail.net ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 03:56:57 +0200
Message-ID: <000201c14177$8864b6e0$95b4003e@oemcomputer>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "Nick NICHOLAS" <nicholas@uci.edu>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0109182207190.26589-100000@e4e.oac.uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [lojban] noxemol ce'u
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 03:50:51 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
From: "Adam Raizen" <araizen@newmail.net>

la nitcion. cusku di'e

> But conversely:
>
> {li 25 ni glare vi la melbn.}

More like: "li mo'e lo jackelvo be li remu cu ni glare bu'u la melbn."

> 1) Say sentences where ni2 arises (as bound-ni) are wrong, and that
you
> shouldn't say {le pixra cu cenba le ni ce'u blanu [kei]} at all, but
{le
> pixra cu cenba leka leni ce'u blanu cu barda};

I think this is best: use a ka-abstraction for "bound-ni"; but what's
wrong with just "le pixra cu cenba le ka ce'u blanu"? The ka here is
just as bound as any other bound 'ka'; it is clear from the selbri
that it's the amount of the picture being blue and not something else
like its truth value. Likewise with 'zmadu' and all the others. I
don't like the type coercion version.

mu'o mi'e .adam.