On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:21 PM, selpa'i <seladwa@hidden.email> wrote:
> Am 24.10.2012 23:23, schrieb John E. Clifford:
> > On Oct 24, 2012, at 3:46 PM, "Mike S." <
maikxlx@gmail.com
> > <mailto:
maikxlx@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> le je li fgri mplike li glri kmeki plkeka'a
> >> "The fire-instantiated property of hot things is pleasant to me."
> >> "The fire's hotness is pleasant to me."
> >>
> >> That's verbose, but that does seem to be the right logical form. In
> >> Lojban:
> >>
> >> .i lo se mupli be lo fagri be'o je ka glare cu pluka mi
> >
> > Or more simply lo ka lo fagri cu glare cu pluka mi. (apparently you
> > can't do that in X).
>
> You can't do that in modern Lojban either. A ka without a ce'u is not
> well-formed by today's standards (at least according to most people).
It would be interpreted as a property of standards of warmth: "lo ka
lo fagri cu glare [ce'u]"
CLL 259 4.4-6 The ce'u comes from identifying properties with propositional functions (or not distinguishing them). As you say, Logjam is not very consistent.
> That would be "lo nu lo fagri cu glare cu pluka mi". I don't see how a
> property is necessary in this particular case.
Or, it could be: "lo fagri cu melbi mi lo ka [ce'u] glare". Lojban is
not very consistent in how to do these things.
co ma'a xrxe