From pycyn@aol.com Sun Aug 19 15:15:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 19 Aug 2001 22:15:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 3226 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2001 22:15:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Aug 2001 22:15:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d08.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.40) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Aug 2001 22:15:12 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id r.ac.197e6d7a (4541) for ; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:15:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:15:10 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Toward a {ce'u} recordt To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_ac.197e6d7a.28b1946e_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_ac.197e6d7a.28b1946e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/19/2001 4:09:00 PM Central Daylight Time, cowan@ccil.org writes: > > Would ce'uxipa and ce'uxire apply to two sumti such that the property is a > > relationship between them, or would they apply to different levels of > nested > > ka? > > I think the latter works for ke'a, but not for ce'u, except perhaps for a > coreference to an upper-level ka, and in that case, which ce'u (if there is > more than one) is meant? > Yuck, ptui! Thinking of nested {ka}-phrases. I suppose it has to be done, but still... I hadn't in fact thought of it nor do I think that in the long run the nesting is going to make a major difference (I have to runs some lambdas through to check, but the whole seem to be extensional). What I intended -- and still would, were we to use this system (which we are not) -- was that the numbers would be assigned in strict left to right order (levels thus ignored) and actually written out only when coreferencing was required : le ka ce'u frica ce'u leka ce'uxino zmadu ce'uxipa. (dumnb example, but what do you want?) --part1_ac.197e6d7a.28b1946e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/19/2001 4:09:00 PM Central Daylight Time, cowan@ccil.org
writes:



> Would ce'uxipa and ce'uxire apply to two sumti such that the property is a
> relationship between them, or would they apply to different levels of
nested
> ka?

I think the latter works for ke'a, but not for ce'u, except perhaps for a
coreference to an upper-level ka, and in that case, which ce'u (if there is
more than one) is meant?




Yuck, ptui!  Thinking of nested {ka}-phrases.  I suppose it has to be done,
but still...
I hadn't in fact thought of it nor do I think that in the long run the
nesting is going to make a major difference (I have to runs some lambdas
through to check, but the whole seem to be extensional).  What I intended --
and still would, were we to use this system (which we are not) -- was that
the numbers would be assigned in strict left to right order (levels thus
ignored) and actually written out only when coreferencing was required : le
ka ce'u frica ce'u leka ce'uxino zmadu ce'uxipa.  (dumnb example, but what do
you want?) --part1_ac.197e6d7a.28b1946e_boundary--