From pycyn@aol.com Mon May 21 18:41:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 22 May 2001 01:41:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 90067 invoked from network); 22 May 2001 01:41:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 May 2001 01:41:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m05.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.8) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 May 2001 01:41:21 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.10.) id r.d.14feb6b1 (17082) for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 21:36:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 21:36:58 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: djan. melbi vecnu To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d.14feb6b1.283b1cba_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_d.14feb6b1.283b1cba_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/21/2001 3:56:58 PM Central Daylight Time, ragnarok@pobox.com writes: > Make one up. Aren't there some cmavo that are reserved for experimental use? > Use one of those, and tell us what so we understand you (well, the rest of > the list. I'll need to wait till I can understand anything without staring > at it for five minutes first) what cmavo it is. Maybe others will use it. > I don't see the need for yet another set of anaphoric pronouns (I've lost count of how many we have now -- somewhere in the teens it seems like). Further, there can be more than one thing in the prenex, not even counting quantifier expressions (which, happily, have their own anaphoras). It seems that whatever would work if the sumti was in the first (few) place(s) of the sentence itself, would work also from the prenex. I used {ny} for {nuIORK} -- an irresistable temptation -- but that seems quite sufficient. Lojban can do topic-comment sentences but is not a topic-comment language, so some minor adjustments can be expected. --part1_d.14feb6b1.283b1cba_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/21/2001 3:56:58 PM Central Daylight Time,
ragnarok@pobox.com writes:

<It would have been nice to have a pro-sumti which refers to whatever
is in the prenex in a case like this>


Make one up. Aren't there some cmavo that are reserved for experimental use?
Use one of those, and tell us what so we understand you (well, the rest of
the list. I'll need to wait till I can understand anything without staring
at it for five minutes first) what cmavo it is. Maybe others will use it.



I don't see the need for yet another set of anaphoric pronouns (I've lost
count of how many we have now -- somewhere in the teens it seems like).  
Further, there can be more than one thing in the prenex, not even counting
quantifier expressions (which, happily, have their own anaphoras).  It seems
that whatever would work if the sumti was in the first (few) place(s) of the
sentence itself, would work also from the prenex.  I used {ny} for {nuIORK}
-- an irresistable temptation -- but that seems quite sufficient.
Lojban can do topic-comment sentences but is not a topic-comment language, so
some minor adjustments can be expected. --part1_d.14feb6b1.283b1cba_boundary--