From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Sep 26 17:50:07 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 27 Sep 2002 00:50:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 45874 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2002 00:49:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 27 Sep 2002 00:49:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n5.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.89) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2002 00:49:49 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.249] by n5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Sep 2002 00:49:49 -0000 Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 00:49:49 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: paroi ro mentu Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <8f.22e3567a.2ac4f8cc@aol.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1788 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "jjllambias2000" X-Originating-IP: 200.69.6.49 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la pycyn cusku di'e > << > > le plini cu mulcarna paroi ro mentu > > > > 1- Is {mulcarna} good for "x1 makes a full turn around x2 > > in direction x3"? > >> > I tend to see what something takes a turn around as a center rather than an > axis, which {carna} seems to require -- is this a legitimate extension? I meant a full rotation around its axis, yes. (How would we talk about a revolution around another body?) > << > 2- The problem with {paroi ro mentu} is that the quantifiers > are in the wrong order. The alternative {ro da poi mentu zo'u > le plini cu mulcarna paroi da} is too longwinded and requires > forethought. Any ideas? > >> > Why doesn't this mean "the planet makes a full turn around all minutes once," > i.e., why isn't {ro mentu} x2? {paroi} is a tag, so it tags the following sumti. > {paroi} seems to be a free modifier so has > at most rhetorical effect on its neighbors and there is nothing in CLL or the > cmavo list to suggest that {PAroi} takes a sumti to indicate the span within > which the repetitions are counted (though maybe it should). Actually, it does. It even has an example (pg 233): {mi klama le zarci reroi le ca djedi}, "I go to the market twice today". > Maybe something like {ca ro mentu le plini paroi mulcarna}, though I'd be > happier with something more intervally than {ca} -- can {ze'e} be used in > that way (there used to be something like {ci'a}, but that may be all th way > back to Loglan. The tense can't tag the selbri, otherwise the scope is still wrong. I suppose {le plini cu mulcarna ze'a ro mentu paroiku} does work. It is still very tempting to just say {paroi ro mentu} though. Could we say that the tagged sumti's quantifier has scope over the tag's quantifier? mu'o mi'e xorxes