From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Nov 25 17:18:34 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 01:18:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 68509 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2002 01:18:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Nov 2002 01:18:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Nov 2002 01:18:34 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18GUN0-0004Tw-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:18:34 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18GUMv-0004Ta-00; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:18:29 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:18:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18GUMq-0004TN-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:18:24 -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 gAQ1PwWF071960 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:25:58 -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 gAQ1PwSI071959 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:25:58 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 19:25:58 -0600 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Is .e == .ije? Message-ID: <20021126012558.GA71814@allusion.net> References: <001901c294a7$68b5f640$0300a8c0@avitallap> <3DE20F4B.3060000@bilkent.edu.tr> <20021125160835.GA69822@allusion.net> <20021125180939.GH32010@digitalkingdom.org> <20021126010431.GA71193@allusion.net> <3DE2CB40.4010709@bilkent.edu.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3DE2CB40.4010709@bilkent.edu.tr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 2708 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 --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:15:44AM +0200, Robin Turner wrote: > Jordan DeLong wrote: > >Also, "Foo .ije Bar" is one sentence (or 'statement'). >=20 > But isn't it two bridi? I would have thought that was the more important= =20 > point in assigning scope. (Apologies in advance in case I'm talking=20 > nalsmu - my Lojban grammar is even more rusty than my car). Sure it's two bridi. But so is {mi nelci lo'enu mi gleki}. Each of the pair of bridi (in the .ije one) have seperate scopes, and one prenex has scope over both of them. The whole thing was off topic though, sorry; I shouldn't have mentioned it, as I agree that if one expands it by simply duplicating the `mo' its meaning changes. --=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 --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE94s2lDrrilS51AZ8RAgfrAKCVq53S46eaTwO9GsdmBhJqXVP0TwCgnbaT 2l3JKGagpWKa3zntJnZBESg= =zkn0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s--