From jjllambias@hotmail.com Wed Aug 22 15:41:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 22 Aug 2001 22:41:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 15279 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 22:41:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Aug 2001 22:41:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.172) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Aug 2001 22:41:53 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:41:53 -0700 Received: from 200.69.11.228 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:41:53 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.69.11.228] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: status of ka (was Re: [lojban] x3 of du' Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:41:53 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2001 22:41:53.0488 (UTC) FILETIME=[A3E64500:01C12B5B] From: "Jorge Llambias" This is how I use ka: 1- Every ka has at least one (and usually only one) explicit or implicit ce'u. 2- When there is at least one explicit ce'u, there are no implicit ones. 3- When there is no explicit ce'u, context determines how many and where the ce'us go. (Usually but not necessarily only one, and usually but not necessarily in the first available space.) For example, a ka in the x2 of mutce has only one ce'u, and it is usually not necessary to make it explicit: {mutce le ka bebna} is normally "very silly", i.e. {mutce le ka ce'u bebna}, not "very property of being silly, which would be {mutce le ka bebna ce'u}. {simxu le ka dunda} without any context I would interpret as "they give something to each other", but it could also in the appropriate context mean "they are given to each other", or "they give each other to someone". Of course it is trivial to disambiguate by using the ce'us explicitly, but for most predicates it is not necessary. I don't see the point of making abstruse rules that don't take into account how we actually use or want to use it. What normally used predicate ever takes a ka with more than two ce'us? I know some predicates _can_ take such monsters, but are there any that would under normal circumstances? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp