From xod@sixgirls.org Sat Aug 04 15:56:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@reva.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 4 Aug 2001 22:56:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 4813 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 22:56:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Aug 2001 22:56:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO reva.sixgirls.org) (64.152.7.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Aug 2001 22:56:27 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by reva.sixgirls.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f74MuQG05413 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:56:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:56:25 -0400 (EDT) To: Subject: ka + makau (was: ce'u (was: vliju'a In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, And Rosta wrote: > Xod: > > ni'o I recall a while ago I offered an analogy of ka:ce'u::du'u:makau, yet > > nobody else thought they were anything alike! But they seem directly > > parallel to me. Both are abstractions, and both ce'u and makau focus the > > abstraction into a certain place of the abstracted bridi. > > I see a vague similarity, but recall Jorge's example > > ko'a ko'e frica le ka ce'u prami ma kau > > "X differs from Y in who they love" > > showing that they can sensically cooccur. If I managed to imply that they could never be combined, I'm sorry. Jorge's sentence, which I cannot find in the Yahoo's archives using a search, is very interesting. I haven't yet thought of a different way to state that idea in Lojban, but I am not yet convinced that the Lojban actually means the English sentence below it. Why does makau have any meaning away from du'u? du'u do prami makau The identity of the thing you love do prami makau (What does it mean?) I do recall that the last time around Jorge asked me how, without makau, I could say "I know who goes to the store". I couldn't think of a way. It's useful to have a focus for du'u! How about: da poi slabu mi zo'u da klama le zarci Or, as will occur in fluent discussion, sidestep the issue completely: da .i'u klama le zarci du'u and du'u + makau seem so different that it seems to me the latter should actually be considered a different abstraction. What about gardenpathing with du'u + makau? Isn't this a problem, since the reader can't tell beforehand if a makau is coming up? Now look again at: du'u do prami makau The identity of the thing you love Yet: le selprami be do The thing you love Here we have a thing, and its identity (an abstraction of the thing?), but the grammar is very different and doesn't reflect the simple relationship between them. Is it time for lu'e? lu'e le selprami be do A symbol for the thing you love Isn't that what I was looking for in answer to Jorge's question? mi djuno lu'e le klama be le zarci I know who goes to the store lu'e isn't quite a du'u, but it is a piece of information, so I think it's true to the intent of djuno. The sticklers can replace djuno with selsau if they must. ----- 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!