From lojbab@lojban.org Thu Nov 22 11:51:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 22 Nov 2001 19:51:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 54658 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 19:51:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Nov 2001 19:51:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-4.cais.net) (205.252.14.74) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Nov 2001 19:51:26 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (200.dynamic.cais.com [207.226.56.200]) by stmpy-4.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAMJpMH37731; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:51:23 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20011122144234.051c6100@pop.cais.com> X-Sender: vir1036@pop.cais.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:51:09 -0500 To: "And Rosta" , "lojban" Subject: RE: [lojban] Why is there so much irregularity in cmavo/gismu? In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20011116132744.051fd920@pop.cais.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 03:07 AM 11/18/01 +0000, And Rosta wrote: >Lojbab: > > But also I don't think that "du'u mi broda xukau le brode" would be > > replaced by "du'u mi broda ja'a/na[ku] le brode" > >I think that technically that is what the replacement is supposed >to be. What do you think it should be? mi broda xu le broda is a question about the truth-appropriateness of broda in particular within the sentence. Does broda make this bridi true or false. On the other hand, a naku/ja'aku at that position separates what has gone before from what follows, and says that the following (to the end of the sentence) is what is negated or asserted as truth. I would hope that xukau relates to xu grammatically. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org