From Philip.Newton@datenrevision.de Mon Mar 03 04:28:39 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 3 Mar 2003 12:28:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 32094 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2003 12:28:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2003 12:28:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Mar 2003 12:28:39 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 18pp3f-0000f4-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:28:39 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18pp3K-0000el-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:28:18 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:28:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from spree.gedas.de ([139.1.44.12]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18pp3D-0000ea-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 04:28:12 -0800 Received: from spree.gedas.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spree.gedas.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00860 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:27:38 +0100 (MET) Received: from blnsem05.de.gedas.vwg (blnsem05.gedas.de [139.1.84.49]) by spree.gedas.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00837; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:27:33 +0100 (MET) Received: by blnsem05.de.gedas.vwg with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:26:30 +0100 Message-ID: To: "'jexOm.'" Cc: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: ma cmene le cmana Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:27:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-archive-position: 4288 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: Philip.Newton@datenrevision.de Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "Newton, Philip" Reply-To: Philip.Newton@datenrevision.de X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=23036112 X-Yahoo-Profile: elder_newton coi .jexOm. do cusku di'e > So do you think the following (for example) would be more correct? > > {mi nelci lezu'o mi cusku lo'u ma cmene le cmana le'u > .i ta'o la lojban. te cmene zo labma'a le cmana poi se cmene > zoi my. Mont-Blanc .my. la fasyban.} I think you need {te se cmene} rather than {te cmene} since you appear to be using the order x3 x1 x2 and not x3 x2 x1 (which is what {te} gives you). And I'm not sure whether your use of a language name as x3 ("namer/name-user [person]") of {cmene} is appropriate. Other than that, it does, indeed, look better to me. (As for style, I'd be more inclined to say {mi nelci lezu'o cusku ...}, leaving out the second {mi}, but that's a matter of style, not of grammar. My choice is probably influenced by the grammar of the languages I know best, which use an [impersonal] infinitive in such constructions.) mu'o mi'e .filip. [email copies appreciated, since I read the digest] {ko fukpi mrilu fi mi ki'u le du'u mi te mrilu le notseljmaji} -- filip.niutyn. All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.