From gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch Wed Jul 17 08:07:41 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 17 Jul 2002 15:07:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 36429 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2002 15:07:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 17 Jul 2002 15:07:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta11n.bluewin.ch) (195.186.1.211) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Jul 2002 15:07:41 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (213.3.153.34) by mta11n.bluewin.ch (Bluewin AG 6.5.026) id 3D3523B400019FCA for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:07:38 +0200 Message-ID: <004a01c22da3$d935dc20$139d03d5@oemcomputer> To: "jboste" References: Subject: Re: [lojban] sentences made for lojban Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:07:44 +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 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "G. Dyke" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=81437350 X-Yahoo-Profile: gregvdyke la xorxes cusku di'e > > la greg cusku di'e > > >.i panonoce'i birti sei le pamoi se stedu se spuda > > ({cu se spuda}) yep > > {panonoce'i birti} is a sumti. I think you mean to use it as > a selbri. I guess it means 100% of those who are certain. > Maybe {panonoce'iroi birti} or {piroroi birti}, to use one of > the ideas discussed on the wiki. You could also say something > like {ju'ocai}. or {pacu'o birti}? I wanted this because of the play on it which came later > > >.i pau .ianai do panonoce'i birti le du'u le bloti poi janli le loldi be le > >ti xamsi du le bloti poi fi'o panonoce'i birti be du'o do fe'u do ke'a ka'e > >panonoce'i noroi janli sei le se stedu be le drata remei cusku > > ({cu du}, {cu cusku}) oops! > > I think {ka'e noroi janli} does not mean what you intend, you > probably want {noroi ka'e janli}, which has a different meaning. > The first one says that it could eventually never collide. The > second one says it could never collide. ok > > And surely there has to be a way to replace that fi'o thing > with something more clear. Is the {be du'o do fe'u} bit really > necessary? There must be some neat way of doing this, I need to raise one of the x's of my du'u bridi the original : "You are 100% certain that the boat which is crashed on the bottom of this ocean is the boat which you said you were 100% certain could 100% positively never crash "(I forgot a birti). I feel that lojban has some weird convoluted way of saying _exactly_ the same thing as the English rather than an equivalent paraphrase. mu'o mi'e greg. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes >