From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Mon Jul 30 19:23:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 31 Jul 2001 02:23:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 38421 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 02:23:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 31 Jul 2001 02:23:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO relay3-gui.server.ntli.net) (194.168.4.200) by mta3 with SMTP; 31 Jul 2001 02:23:25 -0000 Received: from m27-mp1-cvx2c.bre.ntl.com ([62.253.88.27] helo=andrew) by relay3-gui.server.ntli.net with smtp (Exim 3.03 #2) id 15ROwf-0000QY-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 03:07:41 +0100 To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Tidying notes on {goi} Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 03:22:39 +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) In-Reply-To: X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" Jorge: > la djan cusku di'e > > >It was pointed out at Logfest that bi'u on one side of the goi would > >disambiguate which side is new (definiens). > > But {bi'u} already has a different function there. In {le bi'u nanmu > goi ko'a}, we want ko'a to be the one that gets assigned the referent > of {le bi'u nanmu}, not the other way around. Not germane to your point, but I wd interpret {bi'u le nanmu} as "a (certain) man", as opposed to "the man" (= {bi'u nai le nanmu}), and {le bi'u nanmu} as indicating that le nanmu has not hitherto been described as a man (which implies that the man has already been referred to). --And.