From pycyn@aol.com Thu Jun 21 09:46:06 2001
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 21 Jun 2001 16:46:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 61202 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2001 16:45:28 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Jun 2001 16:45:28 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r01.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.97) by mta2 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2001 16:45:28 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id r.26.1720ee9b (4006) for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:45:17 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <26.1720ee9b.28637e9d@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:45:17 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: kona, but not the coffee
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_26.1720ee9b.28637e9d_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519
From: pycyn@aol.com

--part1_26.1720ee9b.28637e9d_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sorry about this, but I seem to get stuff all out of order: originals=20
longafter comments, for one annoying example.
In a message dated 6/17/2001 7:04:20 PM Central Daylight Time,=20
araizen@newmail.net writes:


> i mi puzu stidi le du'u to ji'a ba'anai ro spuda po'u la xorxes po'o
> pe'i cu tugni mi toi zo ko sinxa la'e zo do poi se tcita lo selcni
> valsi to ra'u lei valsi poi me'o ebu cu pamoi lerfu toi noi so'iroi
> na'e se cusku i pe'i filseljmirai fa le du'u cusku le selcni valsi uke
> zo do jikau zo ko i le nu pilno le selcni valsi cu sucta i mapti le nu
> tavla fi le tavla to zo mi e zo mi'o toi e le selta'a to zo do e zo ko
> toi e le nalsnu to zo ko'a e le simsa toi i zo ko cu mapti le nu tavla
> fi le selta'a po'o
>=20

But 1) {ko} is specific to imperative mode: its primary use is exactly=20
coextensive with that mode.
2) the referent of {ko} defaults to that of {do} but {ko} is=20
assignable, as we learned in an earlier thread, to any nameable group or=20
object

I'm not sure I follow the rest: how does {ko} fit talking about the topic o=
f=20
conversation only?

<Subj: [lojban] Re: kona, but not the coffee=20=20=20
Date: 6/17/2001 7:04:20 PM Central Daylight Time=20=20
From:=A0 =A0 araizen@newmail.net (Adam Raizen)
To:=A0 =A0 lojban@yahoogroups.com
=20=20=20=20
=20=20=20=20


la rab spir cusku di'e

> On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 11:33:08AM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
> > One way to mark=20
> > directives in Lojban is to use {ko} ({e'o} and {e'u} also work).
>=20
> One thing that distresses me is to see {e'o} and {e'u} used in place
of {ko}
> just because {ko} seems too "harsh".>

{e'u} and {e'o} seem to have different (but not clear how) functions from=20
imperatives, but functioons that can be *combined with* imperatives to=20
"soften" them. That whole range of directive language needs analysis, but =
I=20
think it has to wait until there is some clear Lojban usage to analyze --=20
English is clearly NOT going to help here.

--part1_26.1720ee9b.28637e9d_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR=3D"#ffffff"><FONT SIZE=3D=
2>Sorry about this, but I seem to get stuff all out of order: originals=20
<BR>longafter comments, for one annoying example.
<BR>In a message dated 6/17/2001 7:04:20 PM Central Daylight Time,=20
<BR>araizen@newmail.net writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN=
-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">i mi puzu stidi le du'u t=
o ji'a ba'anai ro spuda po'u la xorxes po'o
<BR>pe'i cu tugni mi toi zo ko sinxa la'e zo do poi se tcita lo selcni
<BR>valsi to ra'u lei valsi poi me'o ebu cu pamoi lerfu toi noi so'iroi
<BR>na'e se cusku i pe'i filseljmirai fa le du'u cusku le selcni valsi uke
<BR>zo do jikau zo ko i le nu pilno le selcni valsi cu sucta i mapti le nu
<BR>tavla fi le tavla to zo mi e zo mi'o toi e le selta'a to zo do e zo ko
<BR>toi e le nalsnu to zo ko'a e le simsa toi i zo ko cu mapti le nu tavla
<BR>fi le selta'a po'o
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>But 1) {ko} is specific to imperative mode: its primary use is exactly=
=20
<BR>coextensive with that mode.
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2) the referent of {ko} defaults t=
o that of {do} but {ko} is=20
<BR>assignable, as we learned in an earlier thread, to any nameable group o=
r=20
<BR>object
<BR>
<BR>I'm not sure I follow the rest: how does {ko} fit talking about the top=
ic of=20
<BR>conversation only?
<BR>
<BR>&lt;Subj: <B>[lojban] Re: kona, but not the coffee</B>=20=20=20
<BR>Date: 6/17/2001 7:04:20 PM Central Daylight Time=20=20
<BR><I>From:=A0 =A0 araizen@newmail.net (Adam Raizen)
<BR>To:=A0 =A0 lojban@yahoogroups.com
<BR></I>=20=20=20=20
<BR>=20=20=20=20
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>la rab spir cusku di'e
<BR>
<BR>&gt; On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 11:33:08AM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
<BR>&gt; &gt; One way to mark=20
<BR>&gt; &gt; directives in Lojban is to use {ko} ({e'o} and {e'u} also wor=
k).
<BR>&gt;=20
<BR>&gt; One thing that distresses me is to see {e'o} and {e'u} used in pla=
ce
<BR>of {ko}
<BR>&gt; just because {ko} seems too "harsh".&gt;
<BR>
<BR>{e'u} and {e'o} seem to have different (but not clear how) functions fr=
om=20
<BR>imperatives, but functioons that can be *combined with* imperatives to=
=20
<BR>"soften" them. &nbsp;That whole range of directive language needs analy=
sis, but I=20
<BR>think it has to wait until there is some clear Lojban usage to analyze =
--=20
<BR>English is clearly NOT going to help here.</FONT></HTML>

--part1_26.1720ee9b.28637e9d_boundary--

