From pycyn@aol.com Mon Mar 12 12:58:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 12 Mar 2001 20:58:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 77383 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2001 20:58:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Mar 2001 20:58:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r11.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.65) by mta3 with SMTP; 12 Mar 2001 21:59:54 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r11.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id r.50.1299c2af (14376) for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 15:58:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <50.1299c2af.27de927a@aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 15:58:34 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] I almost caught the train To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_50.1299c2af.27de927a_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10501 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_50.1299c2af.27de927a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/12/2001 1:20:57 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > {ja'aru'e} are better, because it won't always be clear what > the opposite action is, and as And pointed out it is not > always a matter of tense/aspect either.> Good point. And it does have the advantage that {naru'e} is still {na}, whereas {pu'o snada} is {fliba}. Good question. Something will turn up for them, I'm sure; for now they set an upper bound within which the many and most and few occur. But see the other way of doing "almost 100" <>I have no suggestion for "barely over 100" off the top of mu head. {za'uru'e panono}?> I'm not sure how farwe can push these emotion intensity things beyond emotions; factuality or confidence seems OK, numericals less so somehow. And then why not use them as "tenses" {mi ru'e fliba tu'a le trene} or is that {fliba ru'e}? --part1_50.1299c2af.27de927a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/12/2001 1:20:57 PM Central Standard Time,
jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


<As a more general solution though I think {naru'e} and
{ja'aru'e} are better, because it won't always be clear what
the opposite action is, and as And pointed out it is not
always a matter of tense/aspect either.>


Good point.  And it does have the advantage that {naru'e} is still {na},
whereas {pu'o snada} is {fliba}.  

<What are {so'e panono}, {so'i panono}, etc. then?>
Good question. Something will turn up for them, I'm sure; for now they set an
upper bound within which the many and most and few occur.  But see the other
way of doing "almost 100"

<>I have no suggestion for "barely over 100" off the top of mu head.

{za'uru'e panono}?>

I'm not sure how farwe can push these emotion intensity things beyond
emotions; factuality or confidence seems OK, numericals less so somehow.  And
then why not use them as "tenses" {mi ru'e fliba tu'a le trene} or is that
{fliba ru'e}?



--part1_50.1299c2af.27de927a_boundary--