Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 00:02:03 +0000

la and cusku di'e

>1. The general rule doesn't apply when, say, {e} is within the
>scope of {na}. So it can't be taken for granted that it applies
>to the present instance.

I used the case of {e} because it seemed to me to be more intuitive
than {ro}. Of course {e} and {ro} are equally affected by things
with scope. I believe {broda <tag> ko'a e ko'e} should always
expand as {broda <tag> ko'a ije broda <tag> ko'e}, and if that
holds, then {paroi ro mentu} has to mean "once per minute".

>2. For {ci roi le pavdei ku joi le reldei} and {ci roi lei re djedi},
>I would like to be sure that there is some way to say that the
>three occasions are distributed throughout the two days, such
>that {ci roi le pavdei} and {ci roi lei pa djedi} would be false.
>If that is doable, then my reservations would be assuaged.

I don't understand why you want that. If {ciroi le jeftu} is
true, it can also be true that {ciroi le pavdei}. Similarly for
{ciroi lei ze djedi}, and {ciroi lei re djedi}.

>So what do these mean?
>
>ci roi ku ca re djedi
> -- three occasions, each occurring over two days
>ca re djedi ku ci roi
> -- occurring on two days, thrice on each day
>
>Is that right?

That's what I would like, yes. The other possibility is that
they both mean the second, if tags never have scope over
following terms, but I don't see the advantage of that.

>Remind me what is to be gained by using roi + sumti rather
>than roi + ku?

That the sumti gives the exact interval in which the repetitions
occur, {ca} just gives an event with some overlap. I suppose
{ze'a ro mentu paroi} would work just as well as {paroi ro mentu}.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com