From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Fri Sep 13 15:21:47 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 13 Sep 2002 22:21:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 59766 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2002 22:21:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Sep 2002 22:21:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailbox-2.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.102) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2002 22:21:38 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-105.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.105]) by mailbox-2.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C052197AD for ; Sat, 14 Sep 2002 00:21:36 +0200 (DST) To: "jboste" Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: I like chocolate Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 23:23:12 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <037201c25b41$7ee2f480$4da503d5@oemcomputer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Greg: > And > > > > If, as you have been wont to say, "mi nelci lo'e cakla" etc. can > > be aptly glossed as "I am a chocolate-liker", "That is a sofa- > > resembler"/"That is sofa-like", "That is a boa-depicter", then "lo'e > > cinfo cu xabji le friko" would be "Africa is lion-inhabited", which > > seems to me not the same as "The [generic] lion lives in Africa", > > though each of the two different meanings is a challenge to > > express adequately in Lojban. > > > > I think I've gotten my head round what xorxes means (I just have to hear him > on le'e, and once more on how each gadri affects selma'o KA and I'll be able > to write Croatian lojban). I can now move on to trying to understand someone > else means as a preparation to finding out whether I can make any sense of > what pc says. > > I can see two distinctions between "Africa is lion-inhabited" and "The > [generic] lion lives in Africa", one of them is English gloss, inhabited > having a slightly different connotation (in particular I see inhabitants as > lois and not lo'es), the other is focus, the first on Africa, the second on > Lions. What I don't see is why both of these shouldn't equally be lo'e > cinfo, both in CLL and Croatian (OK, I'll stop this xorban business now) I don't know what lo'e means, so I don't say they shouldn't equally be lo'e cinfo. But I do say that the difference between the two English sentences needs to be captured. > > A lot of your debate with pc could be avoided if you eschewed > > the form {lo'e} and used an unassigned cmavo for your purposes > > instead. > > Do you not agree that for all purposes, I like chocolat is {mi nelci lo'e > xekri cakla} (I don't call the other colors chocolat, more like "yeuwk")? White chocolate is the next best thing to sex. But be that as it may, I don't know if it is {mi nelci lo'e cakla}. Certainly it's not easy to see what else it could be, and hence this could be seen as a paradigm example, along with {nitcu lo'e tanxe} etc. But like you I would have thought "Africa is lion-inhabited" would involve loi cinfo rather than lo'e cinfo, so I am not confident I grasp the limits of lo'e. To put it more explicitly, I don't grasp the use of {lo'e} outside so-called intensional contexts (like, need, etc.). --And.