From xod@sixgirls.org Sun May 27 11:55:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@reva.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 27 May 2001 18:55:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 32210 invoked from network); 27 May 2001 18:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 27 May 2001 18:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO reva.sixgirls.org) (64.152.7.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 27 May 2001 18:55:19 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by reva.sixgirls.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f4RItIn00498 for ; Sun, 27 May 2001 14:55:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 14:55:17 -0400 (EDT) To: Subject: Re: [lojban] Request for grammar clarifications In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Sun, 27 May 2001, Nick Nicholas wrote: > la xorxes. has made some comments on my grammar (and misunderstandings > thereof!) in the lessons, for which I am grateful. The following I'm not > sure about, and would like some clarification. I don't *really* want the > typical Lojban list thirty-day discussion, and most of these should really > be resolvable by fiat. > > 1) de'i > > Is it legal to say {ti xatra de'i li pano}, and by consequence {le xatra be > de'i li pano}? Does the date cmavo introduce a date *conventionally* > associated with the predicate (as I remember it), so that you can say this > is a letter on the tenth? Or is {de'i} tantamount to {ca}, deriving its > semantics *only* from {detri}, in which case such an utterance would be > misleading? (It's a letter on the tenth, but it's still a letter today.) In > other words, does {de'i} correspond to "dated", or to "on"? The cmavo list says "ti'u" is for letters. ----- We do not like And if a cat those Rs and Ds, needed a hat? Who can't resist Free enterprise more subsidies. is there for that!