From gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch Fri Aug 02 04:41:11 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 2 Aug 2002 11:41:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 58024 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2002 11:41:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Aug 2002 11:41:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta11n.bluewin.ch) (195.186.1.211) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Aug 2002 11:41:11 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (213.3.164.234) by mta11n.bluewin.ch (Bluewin AG 6.5.026) id 3D4688CF0004762D for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 13:41:07 +0200 Message-ID: <017b01c23a19$9a035be0$5a9e03d5@oemcomputer> To: "jboste" References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020801014130.0317c470@pop.east.cox.net> Subject: Re: [lojban] LogFest Phone Game results Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 13:40:37 +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 I feel like making a couple of comments on this, so here goes *********************************************************************** > Creatures four-legged and two play along the river. > loi danlu noi remei najo vomei tuple ke'a ku'o cu kelci vu'u lo rirxe in my ma'oste, {vu'u} is "minus" along is {mo'ire'o}. How did the next participant have the faintest idea what was going on? (Apart from taking pot luck among the two or three *likely* possibilities?). Oh yeah, nice "the"->"lo"->"the". > Animals with 2 or 4 legs play near the river.\ > loi danlu poi se tuple re da .e vo da cu kelci vi le rirxe > The animals which are both two-legged and four-legged play near the river. Is the {.e} correct? or should it have been a mass connective like {jo'u}? > Le danlu ne li reboi .e li voboi tuple cu kelci jibni le rirxe > I don't think this works either semantically or syntaxically ********************************************************************** > You can't want what you don't see. > do na kakne djica le na kakne viska {le na'e kakne se viska} > You cannot want what you cannot see. > do na'e ka'e djica le nalselcatlu be do how does na'eka'e differ from na ka'e? > You can't want yourself not to be looked at. > do na ka'e djica le nu do na se catlu > You can't want to not be seen. > ********************************************************************** > There are two types of people: those who know how to end a sentence > lo re prenu girzu cu lei prenu poi ka'e jufra mulno beautiful use of inner quantifiers with lo, but a {ro} should be added outside? Does cu followed by a gadri mean that it was cu co'e with co'e elided?? Otherwise {du}. There should be some cute solution involving sets of masses and a proper selbri, but I can't work it out. mu'o mi'e greg.