From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Jan 30 05:49:40 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 30 Jan 2003 13:49:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 64751 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2003 13:49:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Jan 2003 13:49:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Jan 2003 13:49:40 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18eF4W-0000sA-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 05:49:40 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18eF4Q-0000rq-00; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 05:49:34 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 30 Jan 2003 05:49:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from vinland.freeshell.org ([207.202.214.139] helo=sdf.lonestar.org ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18eF4J-0000rc-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 05:49:27 -0800 Received: (from mbays@localhost) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.6) id h0UDnPh05480; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 13:49:25 GMT Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 13:49:25 +0000 (UTC) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: loi preti be fi lo nincli zo'u tu'e In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030129215340.034cf800@pop.east.cox.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 3957 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mbays@freeshell.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Martin Bays From: Martin Bays Reply-To: mbays@freeshell.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out Thank you muchly for this! You've cleared up a lot of fuzziness in my understanding. Do you mind if I just ask you to check my understanding of one passage, though? - On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > At 02:00 AM 1/30/03 +0000, Martin Bays wrote: [...] > >And also - I'm assuming that plain [sumbasti] is equivalent to su'o pa > >[sumbasti]. If not, what difference does putting a quantifier before the > >[sumbasti] make? > > For DA that is correct. Since lerfu/KOhA are unbound, and presumed > already-defined, I think they have implicit quantifier "ro" I guess that > you COULD use a lerfu as a bound variable by *explicitly* quantifying it in > a prenex. > So are you saying that {.ibu poi broda zo'u} parallels {ro da poi broda zo'u}, and {su'o .ibu poi broda zo'u} parallels {da poi broda zo'u}, and that in both cases previous assignment of .ibu is overridden, at least for the scope of the prenex (following the usual DA rules)? And just for completeness - does it then, after the scope of the prenex has finished, revert back to its pre-prenex assignment, or become unset? If I *have* understood you right here, firstly - good, that makes sense and should be usable, and secondly - any objections if I start a Wiki page on all this? I feel it's the kind of thing which should be explicitly documented somewhere. Thank you! --- #^t'm::>#shs>:#,_$1+9j9"^>h>" < v :>8*0\j" o'u" v" e'i" v".neta"^q> ;z,[; > > ^