From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Nov 25 16:57:20 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 26 Nov 2002 00:57:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 65918 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2002 00:57:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Nov 2002 00:57:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Nov 2002 00:57:20 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18GU2S-0004B3-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:57:20 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18GU2J-0004Al-00; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:57:11 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:57:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18GU2B-0004AS-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:57:04 -0800 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 gAQ14WWF071449 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:04:32 -0600 (CST) (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 gAQ14Wwh071448 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:04:32 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:04:31 -0600 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Is .e == .ije? Message-ID: <20021126010431.GA71193@allusion.net> References: <001901c294a7$68b5f640$0300a8c0@avitallap> <3DE20F4B.3060000@bilkent.edu.tr> <20021125160835.GA69822@allusion.net> <20021125180939.GH32010@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021125180939.GH32010@digitalkingdom.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 2706 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 From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out --oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 10:09:39AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 10:08:35AM -0600, Jordan DeLong wrote: [...] > > It's equivalent after the respondant provides a predicate, though. > > (They have to provide the same predicate for both people (or at > > least that's what they're being asked for)). >=20 > They are? But the two mo are in two different sentences. This would be why I said after the respondent provides a predicate. So there's no mo's in the expanded sentence: A: mi .e do mo B: klama then "mi klama .ije do klama" is the expansion. You can't do it before getting an answer, as it would then ask two questions. Though I suppose something along the lines of mi .e do mo =3D=3D su'o bu'a goi ma zo'u mi bu'a .ije do bu'a probably would work. Also, "Foo .ije Bar" is one sentence (or 'statement'). --=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 --oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE94sifDrrilS51AZ8RAmijAKCQPUK9eWdGHgJ1GenqdSZe8PH6ZACeL8PK ClWj2qQ3m0eAzqyhotqprk0= =L0ig -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI--