Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tu'a zo tordu .e zo cmalu

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:01:34 EDT

In a message dated 10/2/2002 9:58:11 AM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

<<
> I don't see how cmalu is more/less comparative/measured. They both
> have an x3 place. But the one-dimension distinction works fine for
> me.
>>
I was reading off the gismu chart, which has {cmalu} as "compared to 
standard/norm x3," where {tordu} has "by measurement standard x3." I think 
these two notions are intertranslatable -- if different at all . So, yes, 
the dimensionality is probably the main thing. 

<<
> Why {tu'a}?

Why not?
{tu'a} presupposes and environment where an abstraction clause s likely to 
occur and replaces that abstraction by a sumti from within. What is the 
abstaction generating environment here. This is just curiosity, by the way; 
not complaint.

xorxes
<<
tordu: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
jarki: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
cinla: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i

clani: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
ganra: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
rotsu: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i
Thanks. I would tend to say {pamoi ralju} but am open to arguments on that 
-- different underlying idions, I suspect (and mine probably English and not 
Lojbanically defensible). 
And I would use {cimoi} rather than {romoi} just because I don't want to 
prejudge issues of possible dimensionality (I can see someone young being 
small in the temporal dimension, for example).