From rob@twcny.rr.com Sat Oct 06 14:57:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 6 Oct 2001 21:55:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 58212 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2001 21:55:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by 10.1.1.223 with QMQP; 6 Oct 2001 21:55:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout6.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.125) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Oct 2001 21:57:56 -0000 Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-0 [24.92.226.74]) by mailout6.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.6/Road Runner 1.12) with ESMTP id f96LuvH26018 for ; Sat, 6 Oct 2001 17:56:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from riff ([24.92.246.4]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Sat, 6 Oct 2001 17:56:55 -0400 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.32 #1 (Debian)) id 15pzR8-0000AY-00 for ; Sat, 06 Oct 2001 17:56:46 -0400 Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 17:56:45 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: noxemol ce'u Message-ID: <20011006175645.A566@twcny.rr.com> Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.20i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com From: Rob Speer On Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 05:19:07PM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 10/5/2001 7:43:39 PM Central Daylight Time, > a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes: > > > > In the case of {le du'u ce'u broda} the ce'u is in a subordinate bridi > > and there is no way it can be in a nonsubordinate bridi. In the case of > > {le mamta be ce'u} it is not. > > > > Sorry, as I have said regularly, this {ce'u} is claerly in as subordinate a > brid as is the one in {le du'u ce'u broda} and furthermore, as a linguist, > you ought to know that it is. What is your point here? pc, your entire argument seems to revolve around this incorrect statement. There is no subordinate bridi in {le mamta be ce'u}. You can gripe all you want that it would be more "linguistically correct" if that were considered a bridi, but at this point it sounds just like tinkit claiming hexadecimal is the default in Lojban, over and over. -- la rab.spir noi sarji zo gumri