BPFK section:gadri Posted by Anonymous on Tue 18 of May, 2004 20:55 GMT Use this thread to discuss the BPFK section:gadri page.
Posted by xorxes on Thu 20 of May, 2004 13:46 GMT posts: 1912 (I did not receive this discuss message from pc in my mailbox, I found it just by chance.) pc: ... > la > Can we fit a quantifier between {la} and the cmevla/selbri > without getting the name wrong? How? A quantifier is not grammatical between {la} and a cmevla. It is grammatical between {la} and a selbri. (Why there should be a distinction, I don't know. I think CMENE should have the same grammar as BRIVLA.) As for interpretation, {la ci cribe} can be either "the three that I call 'bear'" or "the one I call 'three bears'". I'm not sure we really need to impose one of them. > <<lo'e > le'e > >> > > I am unsure just what to make of enumerating typical and > stereotypical whatsises. The pattern seems to call for it, but > in the cases where plurality plays a role, it seems to me that > the typicality (etc.) is predicative not descriptive. That is you > really want such things not just using the locution to talk in > generalities about whatsises ? whether or not they exist. I'm not sure what to make of it either. I'm not sure I follow what you say. Perhaps a couple of examples of how you think they should be used would be useful. mu'o mi'e xorxes
Posted by Anonymous on Thu 20 of May, 2004 18:53 GMT On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 06:46:52AM -0700, wikidiscuss@lojban.org wrote: > Re: BPFK section:gadri > > (I did not receive this discuss message from pc in my mailbox, I found > it just by chance.) That's because his mailer sent it to both the wrong recipient (wikidiscuss@lojban.org instead of wikidiscuss-list@lojban.org, which is what's actually in the Reply-To) and the wrong subject ('BPFK section:gadri' instead of 'BPFK section: gadri'). wikidiscuss@lojban.org is the account that sucks posts into the Wiki. wikidiscuss-list@lojban.org is the mailing list, and has wikidiscuss@lojban.org as one of its members. PC: If your mailer completely ignores "Reply-To", it's broken. And I don't mean 'broken' in the "I'm an elitest snob and you should do what I say" sense, I mean 'broken' in the "every mailer I've ever heard of, including all web-based mailers, Outlook, and Outlook Express, can all do this" sense. If your mailer randomly drops spaces out of subject lines, it's even more broken than that. -Robin