From pycyn@aol.com Wed Oct 02 12:01:47 2002
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 77094 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Oct 2002 19:01:47 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d02.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.34)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 19:01:46 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com
  by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.122.1825ae68 (4320)
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:01:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:01:34 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tu'a zo tordu .e zo cmalu
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509
From: pycyn@aol.com
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001
X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra

--part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 10/2/2002 9:58:11 AM Central Daylight Time, 
lojban-out@lojban.org 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).

--part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2>In a message dated 10/2/2002 9:58:11 AM Central Daylight Time, lojban-out@lojban.org writes:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;&lt;<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I don't see how cmalu is more/less comparative/measured.&nbsp; They both<BR>
have an x3 place.&nbsp; But the one-dimension distinction works fine for<BR>
me.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
&gt;&gt;<BR>
I was reading off the gismu chart, which has {cmalu} as "compared to standard/norm x3," where {tordu} has "by measurement standard x3."&nbsp; I think these two notions are intertranslatable -- if different at all .&nbsp; So, yes, the dimensionality is probably the main thing. <BR>
<BR>
&lt;&lt;<BR>
&gt; Why {tu'a}?<BR>
<BR>
Why not?<BR>
&gt;&gt;<BR>
{tu'a} presupposes and environment where an abstraction clause s likely to occur and replaces that abstraction by a sumti from within.&nbsp; What is the abstaction generating environment here.&nbsp; This is just curiosity, by the way; not complaint.<BR>
<BR>
xorxes<BR>
&lt;&lt;<BR>
tordu: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i<BR>
jarki: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i<BR>
cinla: ko'a cmalu ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i<BR>
<BR>
clani: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju pamoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i<BR>
ganra: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju remoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i<BR>
rotsu: ko'a barda ko'e noi ralju romoi cimde ko'a ku'o ko'i<BR>
&gt;&gt;<BR>
Thanks.&nbsp; I would tend to say {pamoi ralju} but am open to arguments on that&nbsp; -- different underlying idions, I suspect (and mine probably English and not Lojbanically defensible). <BR>
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).<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_122.1825ae68.2acc9c8e_boundary--

