From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Mar 15 11:17:15 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:17:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HRuVm-00007S-OA for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:17:15 -0700 Received: from mclmx.mail.saic.com ([149.8.64.10]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HRuVg-00007D-8O for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:17:14 -0700 Received: from 0015-its-ieg01.mail.saic.com ([149.8.64.21] [149.8.64.21]) by mclmx.mail.saic.com for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:16:48 -0400 Received: from 0015-its-exbh02.us.saic.com ([10.43.229.22]) by 0015-its-ieg01.mail.saic.com (SMSSMTP 4.0.5.66) with SMTP id M2007031513164818882 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:16:48 -0500 Received: from 0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com ([10.75.0.188]) by 0015-its-exbh02.us.saic.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:16:48 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: spofu pemci Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:16:47 -0400 Message-Id: <1189A858F8918F43BE3F9C7603C73FB4031E7C20@0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com> In-Reply-To: <20070315175337.GN20104@digitalkingdom.org> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [lojban-beginners] Re: spofu pemci Thread-Index: AcdnKyUzUD3nm3dcR9q7P8Vi3TXQGAAAjRyA From: "Turniansky, Michael" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Mar 2007 18:16:48.0143 (UTC) FILETIME=[188D79F0:01C7672E] X-Spam-Score: -2.5 X-Spam-Score-Int: -24 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 4146 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Robin writes: > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 12:12:57PM -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote: > > I don't think the tanru {dansu je sanga je gleki} can have as its > > x2 a conflation of the x2's of dansu, sanga and gleki. What would > > that mean? The place structure of a tanru is the place structure > > of its last component. > > I disagree. If there were a following bit, say {dansu je sange je > gleki broda}, then I'd agree, but I see no tanru connection there, > only logical connection, albeit of tanru type. From the CLL, > chapter 5: > > It may be used to partly resolve the ambiguity of simple tanru: > > 6.7) ta blanu je zdani > that is-blue and is-a-house > > definitely refers to something which is both blue and is a > house, and not to any of the other possible interpretations of > simple ``blanu zdani''. > > Therefore, each element of a tanru JA is equivalent to every other > element. I don't see how this gives the last one primacy, despite > that being the tanru default. And up until today, I would have agreed with you, but after reading what Xorxes said, I read further in the CLL and in Chapter 14, they give that exact sentence and translation in 12.1, but then in 12.6/12.7 they say: the rule of expansion into separate bridi simply does not always work for tanru connection. Supposing Alice to be a person who lives in blue houses, then 12.6) la .alis. cu blanu je zdani prenu Alice is-a (blue and house) type-of-person. would be true, because tanru grouping with a jek has higher precedence than unmarked tanru grouping, but: 12.7) la .alis. cu blanu prenu .ije la .alis. cu zdani prenu Alice is-a blue person, and Alice is-a house person. is probably false, because the blueness is associated with the house, not with Alice, even leaving aside the question of what it means to say ``Alice is a blue person''. (Perhaps she belongs to the Blue team, or is wearing blue clothes.) The semantic ambiguity of tanru make such logical manipulations impossible. > > It's worth noting, however, that both xorxes and I are talking out > of our assses: this case is *not* explicitely covered in the CLL, > and I think that's OK. This is a case where Bob would probably say > that we should let usage decide, and this is enough of a corner case > that I'm fine with that. > > -Robin > --gejyspa