From jjllambias@hotmail.com Mon May 08 17:38:16 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14800 invoked from network); 9 May 2000 00:38:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 May 2000 00:38:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.240.143) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 May 2000 00:38:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 44942 invoked by uid 0); 9 May 2000 00:38:15 -0000 Message-ID: <20000509003815.44941.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.41.210.19 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Mon, 08 May 2000 17:38:15 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.210.19] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] RE: Intro and Questions Date: Mon, 08 May 2000 17:38:15 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la pycyn cusku di'e >Not exactly my problem. {zo zo'u} is a well-formed sumti. For some >well-formed sumti, S -- all the LE and LA ones at least, and I think some >others -- you can form a new sumti by prefixing LE+X. That happens to be true, I think, but it is a strange way to put it. It is not even the most general case. To prefix a LE to a sumti what you need is that it have an explicit outer quantifier. Is that what you mean by X? >What is the condition >on X that allows this? At a guess, it has to be that X+ S is itself a >well-formed sumti and it is strictly this to which the LE is prefixed. If by X you mean a quantifier, that is correct. If you mean something like {do}, then no, it doesn't work. {le do ci le gerku} is a well formed sumti, but {do ci le gerku} is not. >So >the fact that LE absorbs {do} and {vi} into new LE is irrelevant except >that >LE S alone is not a sumti. To say that LE absorbs {do} is at least suspect. And I don't see how you can say that it absorbs {vi}. In {le vi broda} if anything {vi} is absorbed by {broda}, it is part of the selbri that makes up the sumti-tail. For example, if you want to add an internal quantifier it will be {le ci vi broda}, not what you'd expect if {vi} was absorbed by {le}. I know that in Loglan {vi} and {do} are taken to be part of the article (modifiers of the article?) but in Lojban this is not at all the case, unless you take a very superficial view. If you look at all the structures it just doesn't work. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com