From pycyn@aol.com Mon Oct 08 13:41:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 8 Oct 2001 20:41:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 46626 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2001 20:26:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Oct 2001 20:26:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d04.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.36) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Oct 2001 20:26:29 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id r.74.114af10a (4505) for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 16:26:26 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <74.114af10a.28f365f2@aol.com> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 16:26:26 EDT Subject: Re: Qualities and jei (was: Re: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si... To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_74.114af10a.28f365f2_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_74.114af10a.28f365f2_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/8/2001 1:18:07 PM Central Daylight Time, xod@sixgirls.org writes: > ru'a A sutra bajra klama cei broda B .i xu le ka ce'u sutra bajra ku goi > ko'a ka broda .i pe'i na go'i .i pe'i ko'a ka ce'u broda .i .uo > Given that we have three conflicting ideas (at least) about the role of {ka}, this manages to be pretty unclear. On the assumption that {ka} is here being used for a property of things, {du'u ... ce'u...}, for clarity, and that {cei} takes in the whole selbri as its pre-scope, I'd have to agree. The property "running fast" is not the property "going running fast" or even the property of someone's going running fast (not sure about {ce'u}less {ka} in this context). But I don't think it is the property "going running fast" either. It might be the property of someone's going, however. Using Lojbab's view of {ka} le du'u ce'u sutra bajra cu ka A klama B, i.e., le nu A klama B cu nu sutra bajra or le nu A klama B cu ckaji le du'u ce'u sutra bajra. This last is clearly not quite right, since,as xorxes notes, Lojban is terrible at predicate adverbs. I feel relatively better about le du'u ce'u cilce ka mi prami do. --part1_74.114af10a.28f365f2_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/8/2001 1:18:07 PM Central Daylight Time, xod@sixgirls.org writes:

ru'a A sutra bajra klama cei broda B .i xu le ka ce'u sutra bajra ku goi
ko'a ka broda .i pe'i na go'i .i pe'i ko'a ka ce'u broda .i .uo

Given that we have three conflicting ideas (at least) about the role of {ka}, this manages to be pretty unclear. On the assumption that {ka} is here being used for a property of things, {du'u ... ce'u...}, for clarity, and that {cei} takes in the whole selbri as its pre-scope, I'd have to agree. The property "running fast" is not the property "going running fast" or even the property of someone's going running fast (not sure about {ce'u}less {ka} in this context). But I don't think it is the property "going running fast" either. It might be the property of someone's going, however. Using Lojbab's view of {ka} le du'u ce'u sutra bajra cu ka A klama B, i.e., le nu A klama B cu nu sutra bajra or le nu A klama B cu ckaji le du'u ce'u sutra bajra. This last is clearly not quite right, since,as xorxes notes, Lojban is terrible at predicate adverbs.
I feel relatively better about le du'u ce'u cilce ka mi prami do. --part1_74.114af10a.28f365f2_boundary--