From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Apr 08 16:37:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_1); 8 Apr 2001 23:37:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 99264 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2001 23:37:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Apr 2001 23:37:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.209) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Apr 2001 23:37:07 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 8 Apr 2001 16:37:07 -0700 Received: from 200.41.247.44 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 08 Apr 2001 23:37:06 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.247.44] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Not because Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 23:37:06 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Apr 2001 23:37:07.0149 (UTC) FILETIME=[D2D0CFD0:01C0C084] From: "Jorge Llambias" [This was sent to me but intended for the list.] >From: "Adam Raizen" >To: "Jorge Llambias" >Subject: Re: Not because >Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 21:44:13 -0000 > >la xorxes cusku di'e > > > > > la lojbab cusku di'e > > > > >You thus can use ki'u lenu (they love firecrackers) kei ki'unai >lenu (they > > >are not Americans). > > > > I agree. > >"ki'unai" (mu'inai, etc.) is often used for despite, but I don't think >it means exactly that. According to the book, chapter 9, section 13, >BAI + nai is a contradictory negation of the BAI cmavo. Thus "vy salci >le se detri be li 4/7 ki'unai le nu vy na merko" means something like >"le nu vy na merko na krinu le nu vy salci le se detri be li 4/7", >except that the second doesn't assert that "vy salci li'o", (chap 9, >sec 7). That they're not Americans isn't asserted in either case, just >that it's not the reason. Putting it in a separate sentence >("iki'unaibo vy na merko") would assert that they aren't Americans, I >think. > > > >Or join the second clause with ijeki'unai which makes it more clear >that > > >they are not Americans because of the ije > > > > But this one doesn't work so well, because you'd be saying > > that the ki'unai clause applies to the whole previous sentence, > > ki'u included, and that is not the wanted meaning. > > > > What would be the selbri corresponding to ki'unai the way > > that krinu corresponds to ki'u? It is not nalki'u, but it > > seems that tolki'u could work: > > > > tolki'u: x1 is no obstacle for/does not prevent x2. > > x2 happens in spite of/even though x1. > >If I'm not mistaken, the selbri corresponding to "ki'unai" is "na >krinu". "tolki'u" might mean "x1 is a reason that not x2", or maybe >"not x1 is a reason for x2", or maybe something else. > > > > > >The Vietnamese get into the Fourth of July celebrations because >they > > >enjoy > > > >firecrackers, not because they live below me. > > > > > >Since the second clause is irrelevant, you can join it with .iju, >making it > > >.ijuki'unai only if you want to show the parallel to the former. > > > > But then it is not asserted that they live below me. I think this > > one is just: > > > > le nu vy nelci lei tanfagri kei enai le nu vy xabju le cnita be mi > > cu krinu le nu vy salci le se detri be li vopi'eze > >It's still not directly asserted that they live below me. Maybe: > >vy salci le se detri be li 4/7 ki'u le nu nelci lei tanfagri >iki'unaibo vy xabju ni'a mi > >(Not sure about "tanfagri". How about "fagjakne"?) > >co'o mi'e adam > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.