From ragnarok@pobox.com Tue May 06 13:50:37 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 6 May 2003 20:50:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 9847 invoked from network); 6 May 2003 20:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 May 2003 20:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 May 2003 20:03:48 -0000 Received: from craig [209.42.200.60] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id A52B29B00236; Tue, 06 May 2003 16:03:55 -0400 To: Subject: RE: [lojban] 1st Person Imperative Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 16:04:00 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20030506180158.44894.qmail@web20505.mail.yahoo.com> X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.200.60] From: "Craig" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> >> What's the 1st Person Imperative analogous to 'ko'? >> >> >> >> How do you say "Let's eat!"? >> >> >I'd say {e'u mi'o citka}. >> >> But, since Viktoro specifically wanted an imperative, the only way to get >> that is with ko. E'u and e'o do not make commands. >I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you saying that >{e'u mi'o citka} is not a good translation of "Let's eat!", >or are you just saying that it should not be classified >with the grammatical term "imperative"? e'u mi'o citka is a great translation. Grammatically, however, the question was about ko-type forms. The meaning of ko is different from that of an e'o or e'u construction, and has no analogue for first person. But since the value of the do to which ko refers can be set with doi, the analogue of ko would be ko. Needless to say, such a construction is far from useful, as most such utterances fit better with an e'u (or e'o) anyway. This is also one way to translate "someone feed the cat" that has been suggested - make it the same as "feed the cat" but with a "doi da" at the beginning. From ragnarok@pobox.com Tue May 06 13:50:37 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 6 May 2003 20:50:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 9847 invoked from network); 6 May 2003 20:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 May 2003 20:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 May 2003 20:03:48 -0000 Received: from craig [209.42.200.60] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id A52B29B00236; Tue, 06 May 2003 16:03:55 -0400 To: Subject: RE: [lojban] 1st Person Imperative Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 16:04:00 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20030506180158.44894.qmail@web20505.mail.yahoo.com> X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.200.60] From: "Craig" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> >> What's the 1st Person Imperative analogous to 'ko'? >> >> >> >> How do you say "Let's eat!"? >> >> >I'd say {e'u mi'o citka}. >> >> But, since Viktoro specifically wanted an imperative, the only way to get >> that is with ko. E'u and e'o do not make commands. >I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you saying that >{e'u mi'o citka} is not a good translation of "Let's eat!", >or are you just saying that it should not be classified >with the grammatical term "imperative"? e'u mi'o citka is a great translation. Grammatically, however, the question was about ko-type forms. The meaning of ko is different from that of an e'o or e'u construction, and has no analogue for first person. But since the value of the do to which ko refers can be set with doi, the analogue of ko would be ko. Needless to say, such a construction is far from useful, as most such utterances fit better with an e'u (or e'o) anyway. This is also one way to translate "someone feed the cat" that has been suggested - make it the same as "feed the cat" but with a "doi da" at the beginning.