From lojban-out@lojban.org Wed Oct 02 07:54:52 2002
Return-Path: <lojban-out@lojban.org>
X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 2 Oct 2002 14:54:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 76685 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 14:54:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2002 14:54:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 14:54:52 -0000
Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05)
  id 17wkwt-0004VC-00
  for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 02 Oct 2002 07:58:03 -0700
Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain)
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05)
  id 17wkwI-0004Uq-00; Wed, 02 Oct 2002 07:57:26 -0700
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 02 Oct 2002 07:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root)
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05)
  id 17wkwE-0004Uf-00
  for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 02 Oct 2002 07:57:22 -0700
Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1])
  by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g92F1SGZ078406
  for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:01:28 -0500 (CDT)
  (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com)
Received: (from fracture@localhost)
  by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g92F1RPO078405
  for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:01:27 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:01:27 -0500
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: tu'o du'u (was Re: xoi'a)
Message-ID: <20021002150127.GA78260@allusion.net>
References: <sd9b0a44.069@gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <sd9b0a44.069@gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-archive-position: 1820
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net
Precedence: bulk
X-list: lojban-list
X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong <fracture@allusion.net>
From: Jordan DeLong <lojban-out@lojban.org>
Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790
X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out

--ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 03:01:06PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> jordan:
[...]
> #> {le du'u} is used a lot by everybody (though {le} is not really
> #> appropriate there), and many uses of {le nu} should have {du'u}
> #> instead (though maybe usage is improving in this regard?).
> #
> #Sure, many uses of "le nu" should be something like "lo'e nu" or
> #"lo nu" or whatnot. But I can't think of an example of an incorrect
> #"le" with du'u like you're talking about. Did you have something in min=
d?
>=20
> "le du'u" =3D "each of certain du'u". If there is only 1 du'u for a given=
=20
> propositional content, then reference will succeed, but it's a bit like
> referring to my head as "each of certain of my head(s)" -- rather
> misleading. "le broda" implies the question "Which broda?".
> So "le gerku" is sensible, because "Which dog?" is a reasonable
> response, but "le mamta be mi" is odd because "Which mother of
> yours?" is redundant, though it can also be interpreted as
> "She (i.e. my mother)", in which case the {le} is not odd.

This wasn't an example of a bad usage of "le" with du'u. Remember,
x1 of du'u is a predication (formed by the abstraction inside the
du'u). As far as I can think it, there's no difference between
ledu'u and lodu'u, because you just said the predication. No one
can ask "which predicaton?" (sensibly).

--=20
Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku

--ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE9mwpHDrrilS51AZ8RAjdvAJ0f//I1m4fpsRoiWou5V9QQ7+JFwACgs3KZ
sX7H3SXqjkm1mniuL672mAc=
=oPKQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH--

