Subject: Re: [lojban] lo'e (and all the other LE)

From: And Rosta <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 15:30:29 +0000

>>> "G. Dyke" <[email-masked]> 11/04/01 05:07pm >>>
#Somewhere in one of the digests, I saw SAE = standard average 
#european. Is this a {lo'e ropno} ?

{lo'e ropno bangu}, yes. The idea was that (Western) European languages
are much of a muchness, tantamount to being a single language.

#Could the glossing typical/stereotypical for lo'e/le'e be extended to
#other -e/-o? (ie. the ideosyncratic part = stereo)

How do you mean?

#I've come to the conclusion that leKA rarely means anything like what I
#usually what to say, but I can't figure out what I should be saying : I can
#make no sense out of And's lo'edu'u.

"du'u" in my usage is orthodox. I use "lo'e" because there is only one
"du'u" of any given type (unless it contains a Qkau, according to Jorge
and pc).

#Are set descriptors of any use except for place structures that require a
#set.?

No, but cmima is an important predicate, and, unlike, Jorge I think lo'i/le'i
are useful, unless, as I would prefer, we followed Loglan in treating 
masses as groups with setlike properties.

#joining the two last points together, I was wondering which LE and KA 
#could be combined? what do you make of:
# lonu fatne bajra na'e fatni leika co'e lo'i nu bajra

= lo nu fatne bajra cu na'e fatne lei ka ce'u co'e lo'i nu bajra?

There is an event of running backwards such that it is not the
reverse ordering of properties, taken jointly, of being in a
certain relationship with the set of events of running.

I've no idea what this is supposed to mean. What is the English
version of what you intended?

--And.