sentence
implies that they (the two bridi) are connected by the {ba} and that the
{ba} is not modifying the following bridi in the normal (self-contained)
fashion am I right so far?
2010/3/23 Jorge Llambías
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
> > Ok, so t
> doi xorxes xu do da'asnu lo nu da'asnu lo du'u da'asnu .i .oi lo besna
> be mi cu cortu
.u'icai .i mi pu simsa pensi
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Michael Turniansky
wrote:
> 2010/3/23 Jorge Llambías :
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:39 PM, A. PIEKARSKI wrote:
> >>
> >> "We're having one [ar
Ok, so the difference between:
broda .ibabo brode
and
broda .ibaku brode
Is that the first one is saying that {brode} happens after {broda} and the
second one is saying that {brode} happens after (?) default of the speakers
present?
I'm probably being a little intentionally thick here. The fi
owing sumti and what is it's "origin"?
2010/3/21 Jorge Llambías
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 4:25 AM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
> > I've been perusing the CLL looking for an answer but haven't found a very
> > clear one so I'll ask here. Does {broda .imu&#x
I've been perusing the CLL looking for an answer but haven't found a very
clear one so I'll ask here. Does {broda .imu'ibo brode} mean "broda
therefore (motivationally) brode" or "broda because of (motivationally)
brode"? Same question for PU. Basically this use of {bo} confuses me in
just about
This whole topic reminds me of e-prime. I haven't thought about that
project in a while. Maybe you will find it interesting, Ian, in your quest
for a language with no indirect questions :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime
2010/3/15 Jorge Llambías
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Ian Jo
nderstanding of "event" was just too
narrow.
Thanks for clearing that up.
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:28 PM, tijlan wrote:
> On 13 March 2010 16:26, Luke Bergen wrote:
> >> So you object to:
> >>
> >>mi viska lo nu lo nanmu cu bajra
> >>
> &g
t to be more specific than just {nu kukte}
2010/3/13 Jorge Llambías
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
> > You don't think events are abstract? I don't think I can see the event
> of
> > running for example. I can see a man who is runnin
You don't think events are abstract? I don't think I can see the event of
running for example. I can see a man *who is* running, but the event itself
seems like an un-seeable thing.
ta'onai I find myself (un-desirably) just using {nu} out of laziness. I
really want to memorize za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu
mbías
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > oops, my bad. I wondered about that, but I thought that {y} doesn't
> count
> > when looking to see if the first 5 letters contain a CC pair.
>
> "y" doesn't count, but fu'ivla can
oops, my bad. I wondered about that, but I thought that {y} doesn't count
when looking to see if the first 5 letters contain a CC pair.
2010/3/2 Jorge Llambías
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > and I'm
> > not sure if {xumymetano} is a va
I believe {xu} will work for your purposes. {xu} applies to the previous
word or the construct that that word begins. So when it's used at the
beginning of a sentence it applies to the {.i} and consequently the whole
bridi. But if you were to say {ma'a reroi xu cipygau lo xumymetano} I think
tha
Thanks for all the responses. I think I get it now. I guess I'd better get
to learning FAhA then :)
2010/2/28 Jorge Llambías
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
> > I'm still confused by what "I eat
> > the apple an event of me sleeping
is this different way of
using VI/ZA part of some other proposal? Or is it just how people have been
using it?
2010/2/27 Jorge Llambías
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
> > Ok, so, what you're describing, xorxes, is something different from the
> CLL
Ok, so, what you're describing, xorxes, is something different from the CLL
I think. I thought I always understood VA/ZI as sumtcita but I guess not.
The CLL version I understand to mean that {mi citka lo plise za lo nu mi
sipna} means "I eat the apple a medium time distance from the event of me
I'm confused, I always believed ZI/VA to express where/when the bridi is
happening in relation to the following sumti. e.g. {mi pu citka vi lo
xamsi} "I ate near the ocean" (who cares where that ocean is in relation to
where we are now). How would you say that if {vi} marks how far away from
the
would {zi ma do co'a sipna ca lo prulamcte } also be valid?
In general how do multiple tense markers work in a bridi? Is it legitimate
to say {mi klama lo zarci ca lo cabnanca ca lo cabjeftu ca lo cabdei }?
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Ian Johnson wrote:
> 2010/2/25 Jorge Llambías :
> > On
> For example: u'e zei cizra, lol zei cizra, brbrbr zei cizra.
Is it legitimate to mix in free-style English into lojban if you use {zei}
like that? {lol zei cizra} .u'i
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:07 PM, tijlan wrote:
> On 25 February 2010 05:52, Luke Bergen wrote:
> &
ong the lines of causing the
> feeling of trippiness (like a weird kaleidoscope or something; not so
> much hallucinogens per se), rather than feeling trippy (which I agree
> would probably work well as an attitudinal combination).
>
> mu'omi'e latros.
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2
1) You could try a lujvo like {nuncu'e} or {nunselctu}, or something similar
for class. Then it would be {mi klama lo nunselctu .i co'o}
2) jbovlaste.lojban.org is a good source for word definitions.
3) I guess it would depend on what you mean by "trippy". Maybe some lujvo
with {cizra} in it so
Oh wow. I didn't realize that. How would you even use {ki} with a modal?
Would it be like {mi klama le zdani va'oki mi famgau lo gunka} or would it
be {... va'o mi famgau lo gunka ki}. And would all other bridi following
this one have the automatic sumti added to them of {... va'o mi famgau lo
When you say " 'stickies' modals" you mean " 'stickies' tenses" right? I
don't think I'd want my modal sumti to become sticky to future sumti ;)
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Jameson Orndorff wrote:
> Also, let's not forget one of my favorite words in the language -
> {ki}! {ki} "stickies" mo
Interesting. du'u vs se du'u always kind of confused me.
So, would {mi cusku lo se du'u mi klama lo zarci} be equal to both {mi cusku
lu mi klama lo zarci} and {mi cusku lu lo zarci se cu klama mi} since they
both represent the same bridi but in different ways?
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:16 PM, M
If I'm understanding the sound that you're talking about correctly maybe
{ju'i} since in my experience the "asterisk" sound is usually used to call
attention to the user that their attention is needed.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:15 PM, DataPacRat wrote:
> Jorge Llambías wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 20
I think you're missing a few {lo}'s but other than that it looks fine to me
(... li'u traji lo ka vajni fo lo preti)
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:24 AM, DataPacRat wrote:
> Thank you, everyone, for your help here; you helped me learn a few
> things I hadn't thought of before.
>
> As a final questi
.u'i Oh, lojban and your strict typing. I still kind of wonder why the
{nu} is strictly necessary when the definition lets the user know that it's
an abstraction in there to begin with.
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:51 PM, chris kerr wrote:
> Oops, I better fix that before someone gets on me about
> But how would you add the sense of "You are competent/able"? I feel like
{.e'e} means that *I* feel competent, which isn't really what I think I want
to say...
{.e'edai} then?
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Oren wrote:
> mmm, I like {io} ...is there actually a difference between saying
> "
I believe that is fine and jbofi'e seems to agree :)
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Christopher Doty wrote:
> I've been looking at the attitudinals (which are rad, btw), and have a
> question about pei (!).
>
> In CLL, it talks about using pei on its own to ask something along the
> lines of "
Yes. lujvo have explicit definitions. They have exactly the same precision
as a gismu does. Tanru, however, are vague and can mean many things based
on context.
So for instance, {retsku} means "x1 asks/puts question x2 (sedu'u/text/lu'e
concept) of/to x3 via expressive medium x4 about subject x
lo gerku cu zvati le jupku'a
le gerku cu zvati le jupku'a
ci gerku cu zvati le jupku'a
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Colin Wright <
colin.wri...@denbridgemarine.com> wrote:
> What are the suggested ways of saying:
>
> There are some dogs in the kitchen.
>
> The dogs are in the kitchen.
>
> Th
ences below were not my doing! These were the proposed
> earlier
> > in the thread by Pierre Abbat and Luke Bergen, respectively.
> >
> > Both contain a "sel" prefix, which I know has something to do with a
> "second
> > conversion," but in this
u'i .i mi na pensi la'e di'u ca lo nu mi cusku
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:29 PM, tijlan wrote:
> 2009/11/1 Luke Bergen :
> >>The difference is that events of
> > being dead don't usually ever end, so its unlikely that one would
> > speak of "ba&
>The difference is that events of
being dead don't usually ever end, so its unlikely that one would
speak of "ba'o morsi", "having been dead", except in some very special
contexts.
such as {lo nicte pe lo ba'o morsi} (possible translation of "the night of
the living dead")
2009/11/1 Jorge Llambía
1. I think you probably want {lo sodva} since you probably mean "soda in
general" and not "some particular soda that I have in mind e.g. _this_
soda". Also, you need to put {cu} between {sodva} and {xamgu} or else it
becomes "the soda type of good" (it becomes a tanru). And I'm not sure
(som
u will succeed or fail. In this way you do not 'try'
> you merely do, or do not do. Therefore, choose to do".
> ...yeah, I prefer the way Yoda says it, I'll be honest ;0)
>
>
> -Original Message-
> *From:* lojban-beginners-bou...@lojban.org [mailto
llshit, but consider
when star wars came out.
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ryan Leach wrote:
> Okay I could see that. I have to ask a question though. What does it
> mean for trying to be an illusion?
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> > On Tu
see I understood yoda to be saying "you either do, or do not do. 'trying'
is an illusion". As in, you either do what you intend to do, or you do not,
there is no such thing as "try".
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Ryan Leach wrote:
> I think we may be looking at the text to be translated wr
I *think* that the first one is ok, although I would tend to say {da poi mi
viska cu xamgu}. {xamgu} is good. {gleki} is happy.
likewise, I *think* that the second one is ok, but again, I would find it
more natural to say {mi viska da poi citka ke'a}
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Ryan Leach
cool, what's your handle there?
I'm not logged in now (I'm at work) but when I log in, usually in the
evenings, I am {pafcribe} (papa bear)
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 3:38 PM, wrote:
> > That is, of course, one of the beautiful things about lojban. There are
> > dozens (if not hundreds) of ways t
That is, of course, one of the beautiful things about lojban. There are
dozens (if not hundreds) of ways to say the same thing as per your personal
style, desired emphasis, etc...
I'd like to recommend that if you want to learn lojban, one really good
place to go is #lojban on freenode. (see
htt
nice, looking back at my translation I see a few things that I probably
should have done differently. However, selckiku, shouldn't your {.i ki'u
bo}'s be {.i seki'u bo}'s?
{ki'u} is "becaues of reason " and you want " is the reason that
"
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Stela Selcki
>I discovered Lojban a few days ago and have grown fond of it.
Welcome!
Here's a stab at translating your thing (what is it from by the way?)
do tolmorji ro da poi do pu djuno
.i do cirko ro da poi do djuno ku'o .e ro da poi do morji ku'o .e ro da poi
do bilga .ija'ebo
do ruble lo ka se xlura lo
Besides the above replies, if the x1 were somewhere else it would be more
wordy/awkward (well, not really) to say things like {mi viska lo gusni}.
I've definitely noticed a pattern in the gismu that, when possible, if it
makes sense to say "the garden" then most likely the x1 position ( of
{purdi}
well, that's an observative so wouldn't you translate that as "someone
stops" no "STOP!" which would be more like {ko sisti}
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 9:11 AM, james riley wrote:
> sisti - STOP!
>
> 2009/9/14 tijlan
>
> 2009/9/14 :
>> > In a message dated 9/13/2009 23:11:58 Eastern Daylight Time
but even then, would a proper lojbanization of that english be something
like {mi kecti lo tricu lo nu ri farlu gi'e na seltrina}
2009/9/10 Jorge Llambías
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
> > So (object)? I'm pretty sure I've seen t
So (object)? I'm pretty sure I've seen that used a lot in the gismu
definitions.
Is it possible to make it any more generic than that? Is there no way to
feel sorry for an event or a property? I'm thinking not.
2009/9/10 Jorge Llambías
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Lu
you're right. Damn english. Then I guess what tiljan said "sentient
being" or something. But even then, can I pity a plant that's shriveling up
because it has no sunlight? Maybe (living being)?
2009/9/10 Jorge Llambías
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Luke Ber
human being?
2009/9/10 Jorge Llambías
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
> > Why does the x2 of {kecti} need to be a person? Can I not feel pity for
> a
> > dog?
>
> "x1 is sorry for x2" would be ambiguous, it could mean "is sorry
Why does the x2 of {kecti} need to be a person? Can I not feel pity for a
dog? Similarly, though maybe a bit less arguable, does even the x1 need to
be a "person"?
kecti kec ke'i pity x1 (person)
pities/feels sorry for x2 (person) about x3
(abstraction)
Now that I think about it, how can one command ones self to do something?
One can express intention, determination to do a thing, or desire (all of
which are expressible through attitudinals), but what would it mean to
express the imperative {ko} to ones self?
Furthermore, {do} means "the listener
So I'm trying to figure out if I'm ready to start trying to read {la alis.
cizra je cinri zukte vi le selmacygu'e}. I had heard that the translation
does a lot of clever word-play like the original does. Does anyone have
some good examples of just how "clever" such word-play is? I'm reaching the
This really isn't the right place for this, but really quick, let me just
clarify something that I think you're getting confused about Alexandre.
It's not ___ism if it is based off of tendencies. Let me clarify. Men *tend
to* have a higher muscle to body weight ratio. It stands to reason that m
Apparently lindar had a similar idea (and got it up on lojban.org). Good
idea to use jbotcan, lindar. Don't know why I hadn't thought of that.
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/le+nikyge%27u+selkei
http://jbotcan.org/jbo/res/1096.html
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 9:01 AM, tijlan wrote:
> mi'u mi ai mi'e
That's how I always understood it as well. I think the tricky bit that
Squark is talking about is that it is difficult to express imperativeness
when addressing oneself (or specifically in his question, "us" which has
"me" implicit in it).
the fact that {ko} has "you" implicit in it always kind o
So last night on the IRC channel someone (forget who) suggested a new game
where we give bridi back and forth where the only rules are:
1) the main selbri of a bridi must start with the same phoneme that the
previous main selbri ended in (e.g. mi tcidu lo cukta .i do dunli lo gerku)
2) if the f
, don't you have
somewhere else to be (i.e. please leave and go do something else now so that
we'll be alone) or some such.
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Michael Turniansky
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > that makes sense.
> >
> > t
mood.
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Stela Selckiku wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > how would you say "I remembered to say 'hello everybody'"?
> >
> > It seems like morji would be good but that's more like "x1
how would you say "I remembered to say 'hello everybody'"?
It seems like morji would be good but that's more like "x1 remembers
fact x2." not "x1 remembers to do x2'.
I guess a tanru would work but
that makes sense.
thanks for all your input.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
> We should be able to preserve the tone and sarcasm through rhetorical
> questions
> paunai xu do bilga lenu cliva
> paunai xu do bilga lenu klama le datselzva
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:03 PM, tij
th your {nitcu}. that means x1 needs
>> x2 for some purpose. Using this as have to, is English idiom, therefore
>> malglico. I think bapli is more appropriate, but maybe there's a better
>> option. How about:
>>
>> .o'onai xu bapli lenu do klama le datselzva
>
How exactly would one translate that idea. I was thinking "xu do seklama
nitcu" but would that be "do you have a need to be at a destination" or "do
you have a need for a destination"? Maybe "xu do zvati nitcu"? Of course,
you could break it out semantically and do something long like "xu do je'
hmmm, in the cheat sheet section, wouldn't {ma'a} have all three people
circled in yellow?
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
> coi rodo
>
> The 6th edition of the jbovlaste-based dictionary (in PDF) is available
> from http://www.lojban.org/tiki/books
>
> Nothing new as far as fe
Ok, this whole starting a new thread but replying to both the new and the
old thread thing is making me look foolish. I just replied in the other
thread with exactly "hence 'tend to' :-p". Damnit michael! :)
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Michael Eaton <
michael.ea...@blackpool.gov.uk> wrote:
hence the "tend to" :-p
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Sara Brand wrote:
> Not all of us do. I'm only barely following this discussion.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Michael Eaton <
> michael.ea...@blackpool.gov.uk> wrote:
>
>> Ladies and gentlemen, I think we now have compelling eviden
In AutoIT "<>" is used to mean what "!=" means in java/c/etc...
I could be wrong but I believe the same is true of InstallScript
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Jack Aviado wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:45:08 -0500, wrote:
>
> In a message dated 9/1/2009 18:00:49 Eastern Daylight Time,
>> v
hmmm, all of this originally started because I heard a song by the killers
"smile like you mean it". Which, now that I think about it, is saying
something even more complex than "run like you're being chased by a tiger"
because "you mean it" is not really an event of you doing something and it
has
", etc... which seemed very un-lojbanic
to me.
Like you said, similar to {jai} it seems to have two uses that are
completely un-related (moreso with {bo} than with {jai} I think).
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Michael Turniansky
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Luke Bergen
> wrot
e} to
mean the (pretty (little girl) school). But I see it ALL THE TIME after
tense words like {pu bo} and {ca bo}. What exactly is this usage?
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Michael Turniansky
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > So I have had this conc
Turniansky
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > but gejyspa, when I say "[you] run like you're being chased by a tiger"
> both
> > "you"s are the exact same person aren't they? The only difference is
> that
> > the
but gejyspa, when I say "[you] run like you're being chased by a tiger" both
"you"s are the exact same person aren't they? The only difference is that
the second one is in a hypothetical situation.
I like some of the attributes of the {tai} method that xorxes mentioned. I
also kind of like that
in what way Pierre? Just the in-directness/mental juggling of cmavo being
done?
It seems like such a rudimentary concept. I was kind of surprised that I
didn't get a half-canned response from one of the veteran jbopre. Has this
question never come up before?
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:33 PM, P
So I have had this concept {jai} explained to me at least 4 times now. Each
time I leave the chat room/mailing list/wherever honestly believing that
"now I get it" only to find a couple days later that it's just as foggy as
it was before the explanation. Could I get one last explaniation that
exp
That makes sense to me. You could also probably get away with a tanru like
{lo gubni tavla}
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Tom wrote:
> [lo tavla be lo selgubni] ---> is it clear with this that I mean:
> "a public speaker"?
>
> Are there other options for "an orator"?
>
> ty
> T
>
>
Abbat wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 August 2009 18:41:42 Luke Bergen wrote:
> > Something that I keep running across the need for is an idea like "as
> > though" as in the following example: "run as though you were being chased
> > by a tiger". It seems l
Something that I keep running across the need for is an idea like "as
though" as in the following example: "run as though you were being chased by
a tiger". It seems like this would be something like "under figurative
conditions" or something but I really have no idea how this sort of thing
would
o you
*know* the person themselves" etc...
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Michael Turniansky
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Robin Lee
> Powell wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 08:05:38PM -0400, Luke Bergen wrote:
> >> so, last night chatting in the ir
so, last night chatting in the irc channel got me thinking about common
phrases that a lojbanic parent might say often enough to their child. Given
that, one that I came up with that I couldn't figure out a good lojban
equivalent of is "don't do that".
In lojban it seems like this might be someth
:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
> > From: Stela Selckiku
> > To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
> > Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 12:35:15 AM
> > Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: "The pen is mightier than the sword."
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 a
I see. Thanks for the explanations folks. It sounds like an interesting
discussion.
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Stela Selckiku wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > my lojban is nowhere near good enough to be able to understand discussion
> >
my lojban is nowhere near good enough to be able to understand discussion
about lojban in lojban. Could someone give me a brief synopsis of what's
being said here: I gather that it's a minor disagreement having something
to do with stress/emphasis of sumti?
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 3:26 PM, tijla
gs or are those cases
where it equals {} considered "mistakes"?
tl;dr all *opinions* aside, what's the official stance on {zo si si si}?
2009/8/20 Jorge Llambías
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > oh, I understood it to be {zo si} creates a block
{mi klama lo zdani sa} and then someone else says {go'i} are they referring
to {mi klama lo zdani} or whatever came before it?
I'm sure there are better examples than those. Those were just the first
ones to come to mind.
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:00 PM, tijlan wrote:
> 2009/8
oh, I understood it to be {zo si} creates a block and then another {si} only
erases the quoted word, not the {zo} itself, thus {gerku zo si si si} would
equal {gerku} not {}. Or am I misunderstanding you?
2009/8/20 Jorge Llambías
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Luke Bergen
> wrote:
&
ooo, that's interesting? So in {ba'e zei selma'o} does the {zei} evaluate
first and create the lujvo first or does {ba'e} evaluate first and say "this
is REALLY a lujvo"?
I don't know why I find battle between words so interesting {zo si si si}
etc...
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:22 AM, tijlan wr
mmm, it's a question of lojbanic-ness {zo poi} is the lojbanic word {poi}
but {zoi .ry poi .ry} technically is the non-lojbanic text "poi" so it could
have a different pronunciation etc...
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 8:25 AM, wrote:
> Pierre Abbat writes:
>
> > zo poi na du zoi ry. poi .ry.
>
> Re
you could do something like {lo selma'o be zo ba'e} which I think is saying
something like "the structure word class of "ba'e" " thus you're referring
to the selma'o class "BAhE" by saying "that cmavo class that contains the
word "ba'e" which is certainly lojbanic
Not sure you can do it without us
do you mean http://www.lojban.org/tiki/phrasebook ?
"how are you?" is kind of a weird expression. In english it can mean a lot
of different things depending on tone etc... Some rough equivalent are:
{xu do kanro} (literally "are you healthy") which represents more of that
english way of saying
HAH, I didn't notice that this was on the beginners list.
a'o ma'a na tepri'a su'o da
- Luke Bergen
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:44 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Sunday 16 August 2009 01:02:30 Luke Bergen wrote:
> > what's this about a revision of p
what's this about a revision of phonotactics and morphology? Have these
changed since the CLL?
- Luke Bergen
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Saturday 15 August 2009 23:23:05 A. PIEKARSKI wrote:
> > OK, that's what I thought. However, I read
some attitudinals even have three or four definitions like:
ue UI1surpriseattitudinal: surprise - not really surprised -
expectation
so ue = surprise ; uecu'i = not really surprised (neutral surprise) ; uenai
= opposite of surprised.
mi'e pafcribe
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:47 PM
Yeah, I often confuse barja, barda, and bajra.
Who's barring to the run type-of big?
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Joshua Choi wrote:
> Oops. Yes, I did. It's a bad habit I have.
>
>
> On 6 August 2009, at 10:12 PM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
>
> On Thursday 06 August 2009 01:44:36 Joshua Choi wrot
ng like that would be, but it just seems like
using "close" is malglico
- Luke Bergen
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Tim Howard wrote:
> > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> > "output of a process" is "terpruce"; "search" is "si
.ua .u'a
I hadn't even thought of bu'u.
ki'e
- Luke Bergen
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Michael Turniansky
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > So here is a form that I find myself wanting to say often but never
> knowing
uently, their modals also).
- Luke Bergen
ahh, perfect. That makes sense. That also explains why "other than"
seemed to imply the trueness of "Y" in such a loose way. Because it does so
indirectly.
ki'e
- Luke Bergen
2009/7/28 Jorge Llambías
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Luke Bergen
> wr
luding any Y". Which certainly doesn't imply any
truthyness about "Y".
- Luke Bergen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:20 AM, wrote:
> In a message dated 7/28/2009 11:09:48 Eastern Daylight Time,
> lukeaber...@gmail.com writes:
>
>
> Now I'm just curious about th
ther than X"?
Clearly at this point I'm nitpicking and I understand that the line and
stela's translation is a good one. Now I'm just curious about the semantic
difference between "other than" and "and".
- Luke Bergen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Mich
.ui .u'a. I'm a little confused about the last line though. Why do you
translate {gi'e} as "other than"? I thought that {gi'e} was an afterthought
"and"?
- Luke Bergen
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:32 AM, Stela Selckiku wrote:
> mi'e la stela sel
I see, that makes sense. Thanks for your answers.
- Luke Bergen
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:14 AM, A. PIEKARSKI wrote:
>
>
> *From:* Luke Bergen
> *To:* lojban-beginners@lojban.org
> *Sent:* Sunday, July 26, 2009 7:31:59 PM
> *Subject:* [lojban-beginners] zbasu, finti, a
this differ from {finti} and {zbasu}?
- Luke Bergen
1 - 100 of 197 matches
Mail list logo
