Subject: [lojban] Re: x1 is of type x2

From: Jordan DeLong <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 21:47:14 -0500

On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 03:16:27AM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
[...]
> > > What is the difference between {tai} and {se kai}? 
> > 
> > tai isn't a ka. se kai gives you a quality found in the whatever,
> > where tai says it is like some other thing in some quality.
> > Something like:
> > 
> > mi tavla tai lo'e gerku
> > I talk like a dog
> > 
> > mi tavla sekai leka ce'u jai fenki
> > My talking exhibits the quality of it being frenzied
> > I talk crazily
> 
> I can never remember what that nitcionic jai does. I keep on learning
> & forgetting. (Oh I remember, it's somehow for sumti raising.)
> 
> Anyway, the examples can be swapped around:
> 
> mi tavla tai lo'e jai fenki
> mi tavla se kai le ka ce'u gerku

The meaning may be similar, but it is not exactly the same. Even
if the only difference is just wording (and length).

A better example is to try to change setai (or tetai, depending
which definition of tamsmi is correct -- the ideal form place), or
the vetai into kai. The x1 of tai that is usually used is another
example of the ideal form, so it is more like mentioning another
x1 of ckaji (note this isn't the same as tagging with just kai)
than saying sekai.

> Can we think of examples that make good sense only with tai and
> others than make good sense only with se kai?

mi tavla tai le gerku
(since it isn't lo'e, you can't cheat by turning it into a ka. le
says I talk like a *specific* dog. (don't double-cheat with something
like sekai ce'u du le gerku, please)).

Other than that I agree that there is probably overlap in terms of what
can be expressed with the two.

mu'o
-- 
Jordan DeLong - [email-masked]
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku