From grey.havens@earthling.net Thu Jul 06 03:30:57 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16984 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2000 10:30:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Jul 2000 10:30:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO postfix1.free.fr) (212.27.32.21) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Jul 2000 10:30:56 -0000 Received: from paris11-nas7-53-172.dial.proxad.net (paris11-nas7-53-172.dial.proxad.net [212.27.53.172]) by postfix1.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4394B280B3 for ; Thu, 6 Jul 2000 12:30:52 +0200 (MEST) Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 14:19:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Sender: elrond@dong.n To: Lojban List Subject: Re: Incidental sumti (was: Re: [lojban] Vocabulary) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Elrond I think I found a solution to my own problem: ko'a .eta'o lu'a A ce B ce C cu broda like in: la fasbau .eta'o lu'a la glibau ce la dotbau cu bangu Depending on the intended meaning, "ji'a" and/or "si'a" could be added to "ta'o"... However, this does not keep the "A B C are also examples of sumti in the cu broda-ing situation" meaning. is "mu'a" truly an attitudinal (in the sense that I can insert it without changing the grammar of what surrounds it) ? thanks for any comments. co'o > Here is an example: > > French, "incidentally along" English, Spanish and German, is a language. > This "incidentally along" is also a "together with", but the fact that "A, > B,C" cu broda, too, is mentioned only as mere *information*. It says, > "hey, by the way, A B and C cu broda, too, if you wanted to know" and > optionally (i.e. if the reader wants it to read it this way, while the > writer didn't actually want to put this meaning in it) also "how > interesting, ko'a is not the only one in its cu broda-ing situation". > > As a corollary to the preceeding explanation, IMHO, a separate bridi > stating that "A B C ji'a cu broda" gives far too much importance to this > "informational" fact, which does not really have any impact on the rest of > the discourse. > > My problem here is probably that I need some form of "noi" that adds > incidental, additional sumti to the standard places of a single selbri, > instead of adding incidental selbri to a sumti. A miss in Lojban ? Is > there any operator that could apply a selbri on all the elements of a set > giving most importance to the first element, or anything similar ? >