From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed May 30 10:47:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 30 May 2001 17:47:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 87271 invoked from network); 30 May 2001 17:46:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 May 2001 17:46:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.169.75.101) by mta2 with SMTP; 30 May 2001 17:46:19 -0000 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 155A2z-0000lG-00 for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 10:46:17 -0700 Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:46:17 -0700 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Request for grammar clarifications Message-ID: <20010530104617.X12764@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com References: <20010527202913.A8693@twcny.rr.com> <3B13B566.6000302@reutershealth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3B13B566.6000302@reutershealth.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i From: Robin Lee Powell On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 10:42:46AM -0400, John Cowan wrote: > Rob Speer wrote: > > > > It seems that aulun wanted to say "the dead cat is me", but with {me} it just > > means "the dead cat pertains to me" - a weaker sentence. If {du} had been > > used, it would make a powerful (though very unlikely to be literally true) > > claim. > > > No, that was so formerly, but is not true now. "me " means that > the x1 is one or more of the referents of . This is not the > same as "du"; it is the same as ordinary predication, if the > is veridical: ko'a me lo mlatu = ko'a mlatu. Then I'm not sure that I see it as being useful. Although I'm probably missing something. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno je xlali -- RLP http://www.lojban.org/