From pycyn@aol.com Sun Aug 18 18:10:59 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 19 Aug 2002 01:10:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 49554 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2002 01:10:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Aug 2002 01:10:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d01.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.33) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2002 01:10:59 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v33.5.) id r.190.bb1a2de (17377) for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2002 21:10:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <190.bb1a2de.2a919f9a@aol.com> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 21:10:50 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] .uanai ne'i le velcli To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_190.bb1a2de.2a919f9a_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_190.bb1a2de.2a919f9a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/18/2002 5:47:46 PM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes: << By you don't have the property of being a meaning of y. I suppose it is > something like {ka jimpe fi le smuni be ko'e} (and whatever happened to {le > du'u ce'u}?). > Was that english? >> Well, it was before it went through my typing hands (I find "by" for "but" in my notes as far back as high school -- I've no idea why). << I'm not entirely sure what it is you're complaining about here... but certainly he's meant things, and thus can be correct in the meaning of what he meant, if you take my meaning... >> He probably is a sign of some sort and so has a meaning, but that is not the property he was correct in, but rather in the property of opinning what the meaning of something else is. And in the sense you seem to be using "he meant things," {smuni} is the wrong word (probably something with {snuti} and {se} and {to'e} however those can be worked together) < do djuno ledu'u > dakau poi do tavla ke'a ku'o pendo do > dakau, (as suggested by CLL when putting kau after la CMENE) is like indirect questions using "which" in english: mi djuno ledu'u da broda == I know X(es) is/are a broda mi djuno ledu'u dakau broda == I know which X is/are a broda >> Hmm -- a usage that has garnered a fair amount of criticism, though looking better at the moment. However, what the above now says is "which of the things you talked about are friends of yours," still not "which of your friends you are talking about." Maybe {dakau poi pendo do cu te tavla fi do}. Or, to correct my goof, {makau te tavla pendo}. --part1_190.bb1a2de.2a919f9a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/18/2002 5:47:46 PM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:

<<
By you don't have the property of being a meaning of y.  I suppose it is
> something like {ka jimpe fi le smuni be ko'e} (and whatever happened to {le
> du'u ce'u}?).

Was that english? 

>>

Well, it was before it went through my typing hands (I find "by" for "but" in my notes as far back as high school -- I've no idea why).

<<
I'm not entirely sure what it is you're complaining
about here...  but certainly he's meant things, and thus can be
correct in the meaning of what he meant, if you take my meaning...
>>

He probably is a sign of some sort and so has a meaning, but that is not the property he was correct in, but rather in the property of opinning what the meaning of something else is.  And in the sense you seem to be using "he meant things," {smuni} is the wrong word (probably something with {snuti} and {se} and {to'e} however those can be worked together)

<
do djuno ledu'u
>   dakau poi do tavla ke'a ku'o pendo do
>

dakau, (as suggested by CLL when putting kau after la CMENE) is
like indirect questions using "which" in english:
mi djuno ledu'u da broda == I know X(es) is/are a broda
mi djuno ledu'u dakau broda == I know which X is/are a broda
>>
Hmm -- a usage that has garnered a fair amount of criticism, though looking better at the moment.  However, what the above now says is "which of the things you talked about are friends of yours," still not "which of your friends you are talking about."  Maybe {dakau poi pendo do cu te tavla fi do}.  Or, to correct my goof, {makau te tavla pendo}.

 --part1_190.bb1a2de.2a919f9a_boundary--