From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Fri Jul 20 08:59:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 20 Jul 2001 15:59:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 70958 invoked from network); 20 Jul 2001 15:59:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Jul 2001 15:59:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO relay3-gui.server.ntli.net) (194.168.4.200) by mta2 with SMTP; 20 Jul 2001 15:59:02 -0000 Received: from m219-mp1-cvx1b.bir.ntl.com ([62.255.40.219] helo=andrew) by relay3-gui.server.ntli.net with smtp (Exim 3.03 #2) id 15NcR5-0005lO-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:43:28 +0100 To: Subject: RE: "tofay" (was: RE: [lojban] registry of experimental cmavo Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:58:11 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" Jorge: > la and cusku di'e > > >Tho I know it's standard, I don't like "cabdei"; it > >gives me logical heebiejeebielets. > > Could you explain why? lo cabdei = da poi cabna je djedi, > what's the problem? Partly because I -- perhaps wrongly -- thought that da poi djedi could be a sequence of days -- a week, say. In which case "cabdei" could mean "this week". But mainly because "cabna" is being used deictically -- it's sense varies from utterance to utterance, and I feel uncomfortable about brivla behaving like that. Maybe I'm being too fussy. > >I'd prefer: > > > > mi viska la djan re re'u pa djedi be ca dei > > I can't see how it would be more logical, as dei is sort of the > default se cabna. Default but not intrinsic. I feel that when incorporated into a lujvo, "cabna" should have its intrinsic sense of "temporally coincident with", not the sense "now". --And.