From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Aug 23 18:46:03 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20212 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2000 01:46:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Aug 2000 01:46:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.246) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Aug 2000 01:46:03 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 18:46:03 -0700 Received: from 200.42.152.190 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.152.190] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Style in dialogues/conversation/communication Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 01:46:03 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Aug 2000 01:46:03.0403 (UTC) FILETIME=[0FCC7DB0:01C00D6D] From: "Jorge Llambias" la rafael cusku di'e >.i mu'a ko'o ji'idi'i pilno >ge le fraso selbri bo valsi ginaiku'i lo terbri .i la'e di'u cu to'e >fasybau drani i pe'i do skudji lu to'e ba'e ke fasygau drani li'u i u'i mi pu renvi le nu cfipu kei lo mentu be li so'o ze'a le nu mi troci le nu jimpe le du'u makau ka'e drani be le ka to'e fraso >.ibabo ca le pu'u menli cusku lu cirko li'u ku mi di'a sipna i ma pu cirko i xu do skudji zo toljinga >(independently from the interest one may find in melanie's story, it makes >me >wonder whether or not it is important to specify bridi arguments in order >to >improve the language level in a context where socially "good" lojban speech >is >required. I don't think so, at least not to the extent that it is required in English or in French. But in this particular example, {dunda} by itself cannot be understood as a command or a request. Melanie was saying something like "Look! There's giving!", and not "Be a giver!". (In Loglan it would have been different.) {pe'u} alone wouldn't do it either, she has to say {ko dunda} or at least {e'o dunda}, it is more than a matter of politeness. >In other words, while a simple "broda" is a correct lojban bridi, >would/should a VeryImportantPerson use this kind of sentences in very >"serious" >discussions ? -- this is not a grammar point, just wanting to clarify some >stylistic issues) Well, there hasn't been much serious discussion in Lojban done by VIPs yet, so we can only speculate. I'm inclined to say that yes, they would/could/should use them when context allows. >.i ma djica le zu'o pinka i li'a mi go'i co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com