"mi prami do" or "mi cu prami do" ?
najrut
three65d...@yahoo.com
means nothing more than "is"/"are"/"am." You only need to use it when
not doing so could be confusing.
Remo Dentato
> "cu" is optional in the majority of cases where it is appropriate. It
> means nothing more than "is"/"are"/"am." You only need to use it when
> not doing so could be confusing.
I would suggest not to think this way.
{cu} has no meaning whatsoever. It just separates the sumti from the
selbri so to avoid unwanted tanru.
pro-sumti do not need {cu} because they cannot form a tanru with the
selbri and, hence, it can be omitted.
It is needed in {lo nanmu cu prami lo ninmu} because otherwise {lo
nanmu prami} would be a "masculine type of love"}
But it's not needed in {mi cu prami do} as {mi} can't be associated
with {prami} in any other way that being the x1 sumti.
Hope it helps.
remod
Krzysztof Sobolewski
> It is needed in {lo nanmu cu prami lo ninmu} because otherwise {lo
> nanmu prami} would be a "masculine type of love"}
Some would be quick to point out that it's not "needed" because you can say {lo nanmu ku prami lo ninmu [ku]}, properly closing all your LE :)
--
Ecce Jezuch
"Sick of my life. I'm tired of everything
In my life. I never wanted to be sick
Of my life. I'm tired of everything in my life." - S. Erna
----------------------------------------------------------------
Znajdz samochod idealny dla siebie!
Szukaj >> http://linkint.pl/f2a0a
Remo Dentato
> Dnia środa, 3 sierpnia 2011 o 07:38:56 Remo Dentato napisał(a):
>> It is needed in {lo nanmu cu prami lo ninmu} because otherwise {lo
>> nanmu prami} would be a "masculine type of love"}
>
> Some would be quick to point out that it's not "needed"
> because you can say {lo nanmu ku prami lo ninmu [ku]},
> properly closing all your LE :)
Very true, but {cu} is widely used and understanding it is important.
Wether one decides to get rid of it altogether or or not, it's a
matter of taste :)
Pierre Abbat
> "cu" is optional in the majority of cases where it is appropriate. It
> means nothing more than "is"/"are"/"am." You only need to use it when
> not doing so could be confusing.
"cu" does not mean "is"; that's inherent in such words as "blanu", which
means "is blue" rather than just "blue". (There is no such thing as an
adjective in Lojban.) The closest natlang equivalent I know of is Tok
Pisin "i". It's called the predicate marker.
> On Jul 10, 1:41 am, najrut <ruler11p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Should "mi prami do" be translated as 'I love you' ?
> >
> > I think "mi prami" means "x1 loves x2 in my way" as mi is attached to
> > prami. Then i should say "mi cu prami do" ?
> >
> > Where is my mistake ? If I'm wrong then how should I say "he loves her in
> > my way" ?
There's no difference, other than the word "cu", between "mi prami do" and "mi
cu prami do". There is just as much difference between "mi laikim yu" and "mi
i laikim yu"; one normally says the former, but the latter is not, AFAIK,
ungrammatical. It is not the difference between "I love you" and "I am loving
you"; the latter is "mi ca ca'o prami do" in Lojban and "mi laikim yu i stap"
in Tok Pisin.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "he loves her in my way", but it may be
something like "ko'a ko'e prami se tai mi"
Pierre
--
When a barnacle settles down, its brain disintegrates.
Já não percebe nada, já não percebe nada.
Jorge Llambías
>
> I'm not quite sure what you mean by "he loves her in my way", but it may be
> something like "ko'a ko'e prami se tai mi"
I think they thought "mi prami" was like "me mi prami", which is a
reasonable conjecture if you start from "lo mi prami" and think that
what comes after "lo" is a selbri.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
najrut
Michael Eaton
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-beginners/-/iJ4QInvScIEJ.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.
http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/
This message has been scanned for inappropriate or malicious content as part of the Council's e-mail and Internet policies.
Click here to report this email as spam.
http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/
This message has been scanned for inappropriate or malicious content as part of the Council's e-mail and Internet policies.
******************************************************************************
See the Blackpool You Tube video aimed at attracting French visitors by
clicking this link http://www.visitblackpool.com/jetaime
******************************************************************************
Be a responsible dog owner - Bag it, Bin it!
Luke Bergen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
Kevin Reid
> But ... is it anyway possible to form tanru with pro-sumti included ?
It is possible as Jorge Llambías explained, with "me <sumti>" which is a conversion to the selbri "x1 is <sumti>".
dei me mi notci
This [is a] Kevinish message.
--
Kevin Reid <http://switchb.org/kpreid/>
Ian Johnson
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
Kevin Reid
> Just to nitpick, {me} is vaguer than that, as its definition shows.
The last time I asked, I heard that that definition had been superseded.
That said, either definition works for the example I gave.
MorphemeAddict
Jonathan Jones
mu'o mi'e .aionys.
.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
Jonathan Jones
Robin Lee Powell
of anything.
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Numeric+selbri
It's not currently all the way official, but has a decent chance of
becoming so; the reasons relate to McKay's treatment of pluralities;
you can ask xorxes for details.
-Robin
--
http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot
is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false"
is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/
Jorge Llambías
<rlpo...@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> Erm, actually, there is. And Kevin is rarely misinformed about much
> of anything.
>
> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Numeric+selbri
>
> It's not currently all the way official, but has a decent chance of
> becoming so; the reasons relate to McKay's treatment of pluralities;
> you can ask xorxes for details.
In this particular case it is official, since it was already in CLL,
and officially CLL has priority over the gi'uste and ma'oste:
http://dag.github.com/cll/5/10/
Paul Predkiewicz
i'm not very new to lojban but don't find as much time to study it as
i would like to, which is probably why im wondering what you mean by
le; since there is no le in "lo nanmu ku prami lo ninmu". So what does
ku close?
2011/8/3 Krzysztof Sobolewski <jez...@interia.pl>:
Jonathan Jones
H. Felton
explanation of that:
The following paragraphs list all the selma'o of Lojban,
with a brief explanation of what each one is about, and
reference to the chapter number where each is explained
more fully. As usual, all selma'o names are given in
capital letters (with "h" serving as the capital of "'")
and are the names of a representative cmavo, often the most
important or the first in alphabetical order.
In short, the cmavo are divided in to cmavo _types_; these
types are named by capitalizing a chosen cmavo of that type.
The LE type includes: le, lo, le'e, lo'e, le'i, lo'i, lei, loi.
In _The_Complete_Lojban_Language_
( http://dag.github.com/cll/ ); when a cmavo is described, the
selma'o is given; eg, the very first part of
http://dag.github.com/cll/6/2/ .
The "ku"s are closing the "lo"s which are of selma'o "LE".
Paul Predkiewicz
There is so much to learn, i often don't know where to start...
2011/11/7 H. Felton <lojb...@fagricipni.com>:
Anton Golov
> Hi,
> i'm not very new to lojban but don't find as much time to study it as
> i would like to, which is probably why im wondering what you mean by
> le; since there is no le in "lo nanmu ku prami lo ninmu". So what does
> ku close?
>
Hello,
{lo} is very similar to {le}, and shares the same terminator. In this
case, {ku} terminates {lo nanmu}, to make it something along the lines
of `a man'.
jesyspa
Jonathan Jones
There's also a more recent instructional series that was put onto Google Wave, I don't know what happened to it when GW died. Was it ported to Google Docs?
--
najrut
The first one is translated as
"lo any/some mi gerku dog(s) [of] I, me)2 cu is/does «3xamgu being good»3]1"
"lo any/some (3me amongst those that are mi I, me [type-of] gerku dog(s))3)2 cu is/does «4xamgu being good»4]1"
Yes, "lo mi gerku" meaning "my dog" is quite handy, but why it breaks the logic of anything learnt before ?
Luke Bergen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-beginners/-/U_CQyzqFZUUJ.
Jonathan Jones
Don't ask me why, I didn't make it up.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban-beginners/-/U_CQyzqFZUUJ.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.
Adam Lopresto
This makes things even more strange.Now tell me what is the difference between"lo mi gerku cu xamgu" and "lo me mi gerku cu xamgu" ?
The first one is translated as
"lo any/some mi gerku dog(s) [of] I, me)2 cu is/does «3xamgu being good»3]1"and the second one as
"lo any/some (3me amongst those that are mi I, me [type-of] gerku dog(s))3)2 cu is/does «4xamgu being good»4]1"
Yes, "lo mi gerku" meaning "my dog" is quite handy, but why it breaks the logic of anything learnt before ?mi gerku means "I'm a dog" and when it is used as a sumti in the phrase<lo mi gerku cu xamgu>it must mean <"I'm a dog" is good> whatever that means.
You're creating a rule that isn't there. {lo ... [ku]} converts a selbri into a sumti. {... mi gerku ...} can't selbri, so clearly something else is going on. And what's going on is that between the {lo} and the selbri, any sumti can be interposed, so {lo <sumti> <selbri> [ku]} is always the same as {lo pe <sumti> [ge'u] <selbri> [ku]} and {lo <selbri> pe <sumti> [ge'u] [ku]}. It's true that you wouldn't be able to determine that if you didn't know it, but your proposed meaning couldn't be assumed either.
"me mi gerku" (my dog) has much more sense as it clear resembles "prenu gerku" (person's dog).
{prenu gerku} could mean "is a person's dog", but that's far from the only meaning I can see for it. It sounds more to me like "is a dog that is/acts like a person" or "is a dog that gets along well with people" (cf English "people person"), or something else.
I feel that the "rule" of transforming "I am" into "mine" when adding "lo" is absolutely alien to other lojbanic rules.
{mi} never ever means "I am"; it always means "I" or "me" (since the English distinction between those isn't one preserved in Lojban). The "am" part of {mi gerku} meaning "I am a dog" is because {gerku} means (in this context) "am a dog". Similarly, {mi} doesn't mean "mine", it means "me", with the (implicit} {pe} being the "associated with" part.
On Thursday, August 4, 2011 6:10:49 PM UTC+4, Kevin Reid wrote:
On Aug 4, 2011, at 6:47, najrut wrote:> But ... is it anyway possible to form tanru with pro-sumti included ?
It is possible as Jorge Llambías explained, with "me <sumti>" which is a conversion to the selbri "x1 is <sumti>".
dei me mi notci
This [is a] Kevinish message.--
Kevin Reid <http://switchb.org/kpreid/>
--